On 16 August 2024, Mobile Scaffolds Queensland Pty Ltd (‘the Defendant’) was sentenced ex parte in the Brisbane Magistrates Court for a single breach of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) (‘the Act’), having failed to comply with their health and safety duty pursuant to section 19(2) of the Act.

The Defendant operated a business whose work included the supply and installation of scaffold towers for businesses and organisations around Southeast Queensland. The Defendant had a single Director who also carried out the Defendant’s work installing scaffold.

In April 2021 the Defendant was engaged by a local sports club in Mitchelton to supply and install a scaffold tower to be used as a filming platform at the Teralba Park Sports Complex in Mitchelton (‘the Sports Complex’). The Sports Complex was an outdoor sporting venue consisting of multiple playing fields including two known as Field One and Field Two.

On 13 April 2021, the Defendant’s Director attended at the Sports Complex and installed a 2.4m tall Oldfields Pro Series Aluminium Mobile Tower Scaffold (‘the Scaffold Tower’) between Field One and Field Two. The Scaffold Tower was to be used as a filming platform to record competition games that were played at the Sports Complex. The Defendant was not requested to, and did not provide, any information, training, or instruction to the sports club about the safe use and/or storage of the Scaffold Tower.

On 25 July 2021 there was an Under 15’s football match taking place on Field Two. This game was not being filmed and the Scaffold Tower was not in use. The father of one of the players was volunteering as a Ground Official and was standing outside the perimeter fence of Field Two (‘the Deceased’). The Scaffold Tower was located approximately two metres behind the Deceased who was leaning on the top of the perimeter fence watching his son’s football game.

At approximately 12:30pm a strong gust of wind caused the Scaffold Tower to become unstable and ultimately fall. The Scaffold Tower fell on top of the Deceased, crushing him against the fence and causing fatal injuries, namely a laceration to the left atrium of his heart.

It was determined that the Scaffold Tower was not appropriately constructed, or secured, to withstand the wind speeds it was exposed to. It was further discovered that the Defendant had provided a Scaffold Tower to the same local sports club for the same purpose from February to September the previous year.

In July 2023 a Complaint was sworn charging the Defendant and in February 2024 the Defendant went into liquidation. The Defendant declined to further participate in the proceedings and was sentenced ex parte before Magistrate Pinder in the Brisbane Magistrates Court.

His Honour noted that the Defendant had chosen to enter into liquidation and was satisfied that they had done so in response to the charge brought against them. It was further observed that an appropriate penalty should still be fixed even if the Defendant’s liquidation would impact on the enforcement of any fine imposed.

The Court took into account the circumstances of the offending and noted that the Scaffold Tower was installed in circumstances where it was clear that proper consideration should have been given to the risks arising from its location, including risks posed by its exposure to wind or other weather events as well as the fact that members of the public would be in close proximity to it.

It was noted that the Defendant did not undertake a proper risk analysis and did not take the appropriate steps to ameliorate the risk that the Scaffold Tower presented. His Honour remarked that the Scaffold Tower presented a clear risk to members of the public, including the Deceased, and some of the steps that were not taken were not only reasonably practicable, but were merely cursory; easily taken and at minimal cost.

Magistrate Pinder found that these things were consistent with the Defendant displaying a cavalier approach to their work health and safety obligations and considered the objective seriousness of their conduct to be at the highest end.

His Honour observed that the breach had led to the worst possible outcome, namely the death of a 37-year-old man. The Court had regard to the victim impact statements provided by the Deceased’s family and the tragic loss they suffered as a result of the conduct of the Defendant.

Whilst it was taken into account that the Defendant had no previous convictions and had cooperated with the investigation, there were no other mitigating factors in the Defendant’s favour.

In arriving at the penalty imposed, his Honour observed that, notwithstanding the Defendant’s absence and its current status in liquidation, as a matter of general deterrence, a penalty was called for that would see others appropriately deterred and send a message that breaches such as this, leading to a terrible loss, will receive an appropriate fine. The defendant was fined $400,000.

Further, in contemplation of all of the circumstances, his Honour considered it appropriate to record a conviction.

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