On 22 May 2026, a company who connected subcontractors with small “handyman” type jobs was sentenced in the Brisbane Magistrates Court for breaching section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) (‘the Act’), having failed to comply with its primary health and safety duty. The legal basis for the complaint was that the defendant, as a person conducting a business, had a primary duty of care to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health and safety of its workers; and the defendant failed to comply with that duty; and the failure exposed an individual to a risk of death or serious injury.

The defendant operated a business which used contractors to complete jobs such as cleaning, pest removal, and possum removal, usually in residential homes. On 10 January 2024, a contractor was allocated a job via WhatsApp to remove a possum from the roof of a residence.

The offending involved a failure by the defendant to:

• obtain further detail about the Work and provide it to the injured worker; and
• have procedures and/or policies in place to inform it of the training undertaken or licences and/or qualifications held by their workers; and
• ensure that all workers undertaking work for the Defendant involving working at height had been provided with and reviewed the ‘Managing Risk from falls at workplaces: Code of Practice 2018 – Workplace Health and Safety Qld’ (‘Code of Practice’) before undertaking the work; and/or
• have procedures and/or policies in place to identify reasonably foreseeable hazards that could give rise to risks to health and safety from work carried out as part of the conduct of the business or undertaking; and/or
• through such policies, be satisfied that all workers, including the injured worker, had training in working at heights before allowing them to work at height; and/or
• provide effective information and instruction to workers on the nature of the work to be undertaken and on available controls to eliminate or minimise the risk of injury from falling from heights and through surfaces.

The risk caused by that failure eventuated when the contractor fell 6.74 metres through a skylight. He suffered a significant brain injury which required emergency surgery, a broken hand, spinal fractures, and lacerations.

In sentencing, Magistrate Power took into consideration that the defendant had not taken any control measures to minimise the risk, there was no assessment or enquiries made by the defendant into the risk, the work was objectively dangerous, and the steps which should have been taken to mitigate the risk were not overwhelming. Her Honour also had regard to the significant injuries suffered by the injured worker and the ongoing impact on him and his family.

In mitigation, Her Honour also took into account that the defendant had no criminal history and had pleaded guilty to the offence. Her Honour found that specific deterrence was less relevant as the defendant no longer conducts this type of work, but considered that general deterrence was applicable as companies should reflect on a penalty to be encouraged to ensure safe workplaces.

Her Honour considered that a penalty range of $100,000-$150,000 would have been appropriate but for a downturn in the defendant’s business which was running at a loss and impacted their capacity to pay. In light of this, the defendant was fined $90,000 with no conviction recorded. The defendant was also ordered to pay costs.

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