On 24 April 2026, a concrete pumping company 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 pursuant to section 19(1) of the Act.

The defendant conducted a business which conducts concrete pumping work.  As part of the business, the defendant used flexible hoses, or pipelines, to pump concrete over short distances. 

The defendant had been engaged to conduct concrete pumping work at a residential address in Ascot (‘the workplace’).

The defendant engaged the injured worker who was 17 years old at the relevant time, on 9 and 10 September 2024 as a line hand/offsider to assist in completing the work at the workplace.

The defendant had in place a written Safe Work Method Statement (‘SWMS’) in relation to the task of line pumping, which detailed, in relation to the task of cleaning equipment, that the hose may move uncontrollably while cleaning out due to air in the delivery line, and that an exclusion zone is to be set up.

On 10 September 2024, the injured worker and a director of the company were conducting work at the workplace.  The contents of one concrete truck had been pumped, and the workers were awaiting the arrival of a second concrete truck.  The arrival of the second truck took approximately an hour.  While awaiting the arrival of the second truck, the concrete within the lines hardened.  There were approximately 40-50 meters of pipelines to be cleaned.

Shortly before the arrival of the second truck, the cleaning of the pipelines commenced.  As the concrete had hardened, the director of the defendant company directed that a truck at the site drive over the pipeline in order to loosen the concrete within.  This occurred as directed. 

The pipeline was cleaned using compressed air to push concrete from the pipelines.  While that cleaning occurred, the pipeline was unrestrained and workers were not excluded from the vicinity of the end of the pipeline.  The director of the defendant company directed the injured worker to stand at the end of the hose and hold it to prevent it from moving.

As the last part of the buildup was cleared from the line, the air pressure within the line was released, causing the hose to whip.  Master Burton was lifted into the air and thrown into a metal pole nearby.  The metal end of the pipeline then hit him on the hip bone.  The injured worker was transported to the hospital via ambulance.  He sustained a sprain and strain to the hip and soft tissue contusions.

The Concrete pumping Code of Practice 2019, which applied to the defendant at all material times, provided practical guidance on how to achieve standards of safety and health, and detailed the risks associated with hose whip.

The task of cleaning the pipeline was hazardous as it posed a risk to the health and safety of workers, namely the risk of death or serious injury if a worker was struck or knocked over by the whipping pipeline.  Reasonably practicable control measures that should have been implemented to eliminate or minimise the risk include ensuring:

• all persons, including the injured worker, were excluded from the vicinity of the pipeline in compliance with the Code of Practice;
• the pipeline was restrained from movement during the work activity, in compliance with the Code of Practice; and
• no workers, including the injured worker, restrained the pipeline during the work activity, in compliance with the Code of Practice.

In sentencing, his Honour Deputy Chief Magistrate Gett took into account the early plea of guilty, the defendant’s lack of prior history, its remorse, and its otherwise good character.  His Honour had regard to the maximum penalty, noting that it was a useful yardstick and also informed the court as to the seriousness to which the legislature views this offence.

His Honour had regard to all matters placed before the court, including the agreed statement of facts, the impact statement under the hand of the injured worker, a letter of apology from the director of the defendant company, and the financial records of the defendant.

His Honour accepted that the risk was obvious, identifiable and foreseeable, and that such risks could be managed with uncomplicated steps.  His Honour noted that the risk had been identified through the defendant’s SWMS.

His Honour indicated that general deterrence was of paramount importance.

Taking into account all matters, his Honour imposed a fine of $50,000.  His Honour exercised his discretion to not record a conviction.

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