Disclaimer: Reports are provided as a summary only. They are not a verbatim account of the court proceedings and do not contain all details placed before the court. They are not intended to be used as a record of the court proceedings.

On 31 October 2025, a go-karting company was sentenced in the Townsville 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 to other persons. 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 other persons; 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 go-kart track where members of the public could hire go-karts to race. The defendant provided helmets and their policy stated that customers with long hair must tie it up and use a hair net or balaclava. The policy did not stipulate when a balaclava should be used, and the defendant did not have balaclavas visibly available at the track. This policy was outlined in a safety briefing video which was optional for patrons who had previously attended the track, depending on how much time had passed since their last visit. Additionally, signage displayed at the time did not refer to balaclavas.

The offending involved a failure by the defendant to take the following steps in relation to securing long hair before operating a go-kart:

  • Instruct customers that balaclavas had to be worn to contain long hair (being hair that extended past the shoulders of a customer); and/or
  • Instruct all staff about the availability of balaclavas; and/or
  • Instruct staff on when balaclavas had to be worn; and/or
  • Require staff to give balaclavas to customers with long hair (being hair that extended past the shoulders of a customer) to wear; and/or
  • Inform and instruct staff to confirm customers’ hair was tied and secured before commencing karting sessions.

The risk eventuated on 9 January 2024 when a 17-year-old was seriously injured due to the defendant’s failure to implement the above control measures. She had tied up her hair and worn a hair net and helmet as required by the defendant at the time, but her hair became loose during the race and entangled in the rear axle of the go-kart. She suffered a de-gloving injury to her scalp and one ear and spent a week in hospital recovering from the subsequent surgery.

Following the incident, the defendant immediately changed their policy to require the use of a balaclava for patrons with hair below shoulder-length. Signage at the venue and the safety briefing video were also updated, and staff were trained on the new procedure.

In sentencing, Her Honour Magistrate Keegan noted that go-karting was clearly a high-risk activity and the potential consequences of the failure to implement appropriate control measures were obvious and foreseeable. Her Honour acknowledged that it was a traumatic incident for the injured person who had not been provided with the appropriate safety equipment.

Her Honour considered that the steps to minimise risk in this case were not complex and that it was inappropriate to place the responsibility for safety on the customer. She referred to the Australian Standard which identified that hair nets were insufficient to contain long hair and accepted that the defendant’s use of hair nets as a control measure was therefore inadequate.

A fine of $100,000 was imposed, with no conviction recorded. The defendant was also ordered to pay costs. Her Honour considered that specific deterrence had been realised through the incident. In reaching the fine imposed, Her Honour was cognisant of the fact the maximum penalty was $1,500,000, and $100,000 was still less than 10%. Her Honour deemed the sentence reflected the objective seriousness of the offending and all factors under section 9 of the Penalties and Sentences Act.

Her Honour took into account the defendant’s early plea of guilty, cooperation with the investigation, remorse, immediate remediation of the safety shortcomings, lack of prior history, and capacity to pay a fine as a small business with limited employees.

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

Court Report

General
Industry
Amusement Rides
Date of offence
Injury
De-gloving injury to the scalp and ear
Court
Townsville Magistrates Court
Magistrate or judge
Magistrate Keegan
Decision date
Company
Legislation

Sections 32 and 19(2) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011

Plea
Guilty
Penalty
$100,000
Maximum fine available
$1,500,000
Professional and legal costs
$1,500
Court costs
$105.35
In default period
N/A
Time to pay
Referred to SPER
Conviction recorded
No