On 22 October 2024, Drake Trailers Pty Ltd, was sentenced in the Richlands Magistrates Court for breaching section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (‘the Act’), having failed to comply with its primary health and safety duty pursuant to section 19(1). It was fined a sum of $75,000 and a conviction was recorded.

Drake Trailers Pty Ltd conducts a business that includes manufacturing heavy vehicle trailers and components. It conducts its business at a workplace located at 19 Formation Street in Wacol, where forklifts are regularly used to access and move products.

In the process area at the workplace, there were a number of pallet racks positioned in a U shape, on which products were stored, before being distributed to other areas of the workplace. Workers operating forklifts would need to access the area multiple times throughout the day, to store or retrieve stock on the pallet racks. Pedestrian workers would also need to access the area to inspect the pallet racks, or to access a whiteboard that recorded the location of items within the racking system. There were no written procedures relating to, or restrictions concerning, who could access the pallet racks in the process area, or when. There was a pedestrian walkway that passed along the edge of the process area, but there were no barriers, warning signs or other visible line markings in this area, and no physical separation of pedestrians and plant.

On 8 June 2022, a worker was standing in the process area when he was struck by a reversing forklift, operated by another worker. The forklift ran over the left foot of the worker, causing him to sustain a fracture to his left ankle, requiring surgery, in addition to soft tissue injuries.

It was alleged there were a number of reasonably practicable control measures the defendant should have implemented to manage the risk to health and safety arising from the use of forklifts in the process area. That included implementing measures to restrict where pedestrian workers could access, such as through clearly identified exclusion zones, and implementing a system of work requiring pedestrian workers to not access the process area while forklifts were in operation and to set up bollards to restrict access when they were working in the area.

In sentencing the defendant, Acting Magistrate Silva had regard to the defendant’s early plea of guilty, which was indicated at the earliest opportunity, as well as its cooperation with the investigation. It was acknowledged that the defendant, through its senior personnel, had expressed genuine remorse for the company’s failure and for the impact the offending has had on the injured worker. His Honour had regard to the victim impact statement provided by the injured worker, which made it clear that the injury sustained has had a significant ongoing impact on his life. Regard was had to the efforts the defendant had made to assist the injured worker to retrain and return to work with a related company.

His Honour referred to the relevant documentation and information the defendant had available prior to the incident, which demonstrated it was well aware of the potential risks in the workplace regarding forklifts. It was acknowledged that there had been a prior incident at the workplace approximately 10 years ago, involving a forklift, for which the defendant was prosecuted. The relevant risk had been highlighted by that previous incident and the defendant had taken some measures in response, but it did not implement reasonably practicable measures to minimise the risk in the process area.

His Honour accepted that the defendant had taken appropriate measures post-incident to manage the risk, in compliance with improvement notices issued by Workplace Health and Safety Queensland, including implementing a marked exclusion zone in the process area and a procedure to restrict pedestrians and forklifts from being in the area at the same time. In this regard, his Honour referred to the comments of her Honour Judge Fantin in Mac Plant, namely that care must be taken when giving a defendant credit for what it should have done to comply with its duty in the first instance.

Acting Magistrate Silva referred to the need for the sentence imposed to involve an element of general deterrence, especially with accidents involving forklifts being a common occurrence in workplaces, and the need for specific deterrence, having regard to this defendant’s prior offending. There was also an identified need for denunciation, with the community being entitled to expect that workers will be protected from risks posed by their work.

Having regard to the defendant’s prior conviction, his Honour exercised his discretion to record a conviction.

OWHSP contact: enquiries@owhsp.qld.gov.au