On 25 November 2024, Gough Industries Pty Ltd was sentenced in the Townsville 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.

Gough Industries Pty Ltd is engaged in the business of manufacturing plastic products including plastic water tanks. It accepted a contract to manufacture a large displacement solutions tank, called a T-401 Reactor, which was 4.78 metres high, 3.3 metres wide and weighed 600 kilograms. The defendant provided its workers the plans/drawings for the tank to be constructed which used was 30 millimetres thick plastic and was without lifting lugs on its base to allow it to be lifted during construction.

On 26 April 2022 workers had constructed the base of the T-401 reactor and proceeded to use their usual method to flip the tank base to join it with the other component. One worker attached the plate grab clamp on the base at the centre weight point and then the sling rig was set up by another, with the sling being attached to the clamp and then attached to the gantry crane hook. The worker then operated the gantry crane to lift the tank base vertically off the table which was moved by others. The worker then moved the tank base to the ground, removed the plate clamp from the centre and reattached it to the outer edge. He then operated the gantry crane to lift the tank base to approximately 70 degrees off the ground. At that point the tank base slipped out from the clamp and struck the worker trapping his legs and causing him to fall back and hit his head on the concrete. He was rendered unconscious. The worker was subsequently transported to hospital where he was found to have a left knee puncture and a traumatic head injury. He underwent extensive rehabilitation and continues to have high level cognitive deficits.

The defendant reported the incident to WHSQ who conducted an investigation. It was revealed that workers had told the defendant there were no lifting lugs and that a franna crane was required but had been advised to use what they had to carry out the job. The investigation also found the use of the sling and gantry crane required a worker with a dogger or rigger license which the worker operating it did not have.

The defendant was duty bound to have updated the design plans to include lifting lugs, drafted and implemented a safe work method statement (‘SWMS’) for the work which included an assessment of risk for lifting and flipping a tank base, instructions on how to do that work activity and the creation of an exclusion zone where the activity is being caried out, provided information, training and instruction to workers in relation to the risk posed by the activity and the SWMS and engaged a qualified dogman to perform the task.

Gough Industries Pty Ltd had a relevant criminal history having pleaded guilty to a category 2 offence both on 6 February 2017 and 13 November 2023.

In sentencing, Magistrate Susan Warrington acknowledged the impact the offending had on the worker, as outlined in his statement to the court, and the object of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011. Her Honour outlined the risk of injury in this case was foreseeable and the defendant should have known of it and implemented the controls. It was accepted that the fact the defendant had a prior relevant history was aggravating.

In mitigation, her Honour accepted the defendant had pleaded guilty and had cooperated with the investigation. It was also accepted the defendant was remorseful, had implemented a SWMS for the work activity since the incident and was otherwise a good corporate citizen.

Magistrate Warrington acknowledged the purposes of the sentence was to punish the defendant to an extent that is just in all the circumstances and deter the defendant and others as well as making it clear that the community, acting through the Court, denounces the conduct the defendant was involved in.

Magistrate Warrington indicated that if both offences proceeded to sentence on the last occasion, 13 November 2023, the appropriate range would have been a fine of $180,000 - $200,000, falling to the upper end of that range. Accordingly, her Honour imposed a fine of $100,000 with a conviction recorded for this offence.

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