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 4 March 2022, a window tinting business was sentenced in the Holland Park Magistrates Court for breaching section 346(1) of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (‘the Regulation’), having failed to comply with its primary health and safety duty. Magistrate Simon Young convicted and fined the defendant $3,600. A conviction was not recorded.

The defendant is a window tinting business located at Brisbane. On 22 January 2021 an Inspector from Workplace Health and Safety Queensland (‘WHSQ’) attended the work premises in response to a complaint.

During the visit the Inspector found four hazardous chemicals stored at the workplace, namely:

  • JET All Purpose Heavy Duty Degreaser” – Sodium Hydroxide Solution UN 1824;
  • All Purpose Thinners” – Flammable Liquid N.O.S. UN 1993;
  • Active Mousse High Foaming TFR” – Sodium Hydroxide Solution UN 1824; and
  • Red Wheel Acid Heavy Duty Aluminium Cleaner & Brightener” – Hydrofluoric Acid UN 1790.

An investigation by WHSQ revealed there was no register, including safety data sheets, for the hazardous chemicals being kept at the workplace. As a result, an infringement notice was issued in the sum of $3,600, being the prescribed amount payable by a company pursuant to a statutory infringement notice under the State Penalties and Enforcement Regulation 2014.

The defendant elected to contest the infringement notice and have the matter heard in court. However, the defendant ultimately pleaded guilty to the charge.

In sentencing, his Honour Magistrate Young had regard to a number of factors, including:

  • The maximum penalty of $30 000 for the company to which an offender is liable to upon conviction for an offence being higher than the statutory amount prescribed as payable upon the issuing of an infringement notice;
  • That the nature of the offending was moderately serious. The offending was aggravated by the defendant not having taken steps to understand their duty to keep a register;
  • That there was no specific danger alleged to have been created by the breach of duty, and the defendant had taken steps soon after being issued with the infringement notice to correct the failing; and
  • The defendant entered an early plea of guilty and had co-operated with authorities.

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

Court Report

General
Industry
Transport, postal and warehousing
Date of offence
Injury
Nil
Court
Holland Park Magistrates Court
Magistrate or judge
Magistrate Simon Young
Decision date
Legislation

Section 346(1) of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011

Plea
Guilty
Penalty
$3,600
Maximum fine available
$30,000
Professional and legal costs
$1,000
Court costs
Nil
In default period
N/A
Time to pay
Referred to SPER
Conviction recorded
No