On 15 November 2024, LEG Constructions Pty Ltd and its director were sentenced in the Brisbane Magistrates Court for breaching section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld)(‘the Act’). The company failed to comply with its primary health and safety duty, thereby exposing workers to the risk of death or serious injury. The director failed to exercise due diligence to ensure the company complied with its duty.

The defendant company conducted a business or undertaking performing residential construction work. On 16 November 2021 the company was conducting that business or undertaking at 155-167 Harcourt Street, New Farm (‘the workplace’). At the workplace the company was constructing an apartment block, an underground carpark and refurbishing two houses located at the site – ‘House 1’ and ‘House 2’. Both houses were Queenslander style timber framed dwellings.

As of 16 November 2021, House 2 had been relocated to the front right corner of the workplace by a specialist re-stumping company. At that location, House 2 was elevated on four 1 x 1 metre columns of stacks of timber sleepers referred to as ‘pigsties’ or ‘sties’. At approximately 9:00am two workers, and the director of the defendant company were at the workplace. Workers were instructed to carry out tasks related to the levelling of House 2. One worker operated a single hydraulic jack, to lift House 2, so that steel beams could be installed underneath it.

At approximately 2pm the house had been raised 20-30 millimetres from the pigsties when it started to move laterally. The two workers and the director ran from underneath the house as it collapsed in the direction of a neighbouring unit block. No injuries were sustained by the workers or director.

Investigators obtained a report regarding the incident from a structural engineer. It was opined that the use of ‘pigsties’ to support the structure relied on the friction between the timber members to provide resistance to lateral load. The lowering operation finished with the structure lifted free of the pigsties and as a result eliminated this resistance of lateral load. This removal of the lateral resistance, in combination with the lack of temporary bracing to the lower floor and flexibility of the upper-level framing (due to inadequate bracing installation), contributed to the forces on the structure of House 2 moving out-of-equilibrium resulting in collapse.

The company and director were both previously sentenced for category 2 offences in relation to a prior workplace incident on 16 April 2020. That incident involved a worker falling from height whilst installing floorboards on a mezzanine level of a shed at a construction site. On 30 September 2021 the company and director pleaded guilty to the offences in the Brisbane Magistrates Court. Her Honour Magistrate Daley sentenced the company to an $80,000 fine and the director was fined $10,000, with no convictions recorded.

In relation to the current offending, the defendants entered pleas of guilty on 15 November 2024 and the matter proceeded to sentence. The prosecution submitted that convictions should be recorded, which was resisted by the defendants. 

In sentencing the defendants, Magistrate Pinder had regard to the maximum penalty for the offences and the purposes of the Act. His Honour considered that general deterrence was an important sentencing consideration for offences of this type.

His Honour had regard to the principles contained in section 9 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) as well as the principles set out in Nash v silver City Drilling (NSW) Pty Ltd; Attorney-General for New South Wales v Silver City Drilling (NSW) Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCCA 96. His Honour remarked that the matter involved a readily identifiable and serious risk and that the cost of engaging a specialist re-stumping contractor would have been relatively small. His Honour noted that the incident did not result in harm or injury to any workers, but that the potential consequences of the risk were significant.

In mitigation, Magistrate Pinder took into account the defendants’ early pleas of guilty as an indication of remorse and a willingness to facilitate the course of justice. His Honour also had regard to the defendants’ cooperation with the investigation, which included participating in a voluntary interview. His Honour took into account the considerable rectification works carried out following the incident which were at a cost of approximately $250,000, and that the defendant company had since ceased carrying out construction work following the suspension of its licence by QBCC.   In relation to the director, his Honour noted that he was of advanced years and was currently 78 years of age. His Honour took into account that the director had been diagnosed with a terminal cardiac condition, with a survival period of 3-5 years.

Having regard to all relevant matters, as well as the comparable decisions referred to by the parties, Magistrate Pinder convicted and fined the company $120,000. Considering the circumstances of the offending and the defendant company’s prior conviction for a Category 2 Offence, his Honour exercised his discretion in favour of a conviction being recorded. His Honour further convicted and fined the director $10,000, no conviction recorded.

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