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 27 August 2026, a Chinchilla based heavy vehicle mechanical repair business and its sole director were sentenced in the Chinchilla Magistrates Court for breaching section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) (‘the Act’), having failed to comply with health and safety duties.

The court was told the repair business did not have adequate systems of work in place for performing the routine task of working beneath elevated/suspended loads when, on 17 December 2021, a 16-year-old school based first year apprentice was crushed and killed when an inadequately supported truck body collapsed when the vehicle’s on-board safety prop failed.

Workplace Health and Safety Queensland (WHSQ) inspectors investigated and ascertained the prop had been incorrectly deployed against the manufacturer’s instructions including being deployed in the wrong position, on the wrong angle, with the truck’s load (a detachable bin) remaining on the rear of the truck. The company’s workers stated they had not seen, been provided or instructed by the company in a safe work instruction for the performance of this type of work. Further inquiries by WHSQ revealed the company had not undertaken a risk assessment for this category of work.

A technical report identified that the repair should have been completed with the bin removed giving unrestricted access to the repair area. Workers were exposed to the risk of serious injury or death if they accessed beneath elevated truck bodies to carry out repair or maintenance work if there was inadequate support installed to support the elevated body before the work commenced.

The WHSQ investigation further identified the company employed two 16-year-old school based first year apprentices who attended the workplace 1 or 2 days per week. The supervision of these young workers fell on the workshop managers who had not been trained or instructed in how to adequately supervise these class of worker through provision of structured training, instruction and competency assessment in their work duties. The investigation revealed the young workers had not been trained or instructed in safe work method statements with the workshop managers stating they relied on their own experience in allotting work tasks and supervising the workers.

In sentencing the company and its director the Magistrate took in to account the charges were over a prolonged period (19 months and 27 months respectively) and related to two young workers. His Honour accepted the prosecution submission that the second charge had two aspects – the failure to have systems for instructing and supervising the young workers, including inductions and training, as well as the aspect relating to the failure to have systems for the instructing and training of the young workers supervisors in the special characteristics involved in training and supervising this category of workers. His Honour noted the profound grief suffered by the next of kin present and the impact relayed by them in the victim impact statements read to the court.

His Honour stated the serious breaches by the individual director were his failures to exercise due diligence to take action to ensure adequate work systems were in place within the company for the work beneath suspended loads and adequate systems for training and supervision of young workers were in place.

His Honour imposed a fine of $550,000 on the company and a fine of $100,000 on the director as well as ordering costs to be paid by each. His Honour exercised his discretion to record a conviction in respect to the director’s offending.

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

Court Report

General
Industry
Manufacturing
Date of offence
Injury
Fatality
Court
Chinchilla Magistrates Court
Magistrate or judge
Magistrate Purcell
Decision date
Company
Legislation

Sections 19(1) and 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011

Plea
Guilty
Penalty
Charge 1 and 2: $550,000
Maximum fine available
Charge 1: $1,500,000; Charge 2: $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
Individual
Legislation

Sections 27(1) and 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011

Plea
Guilty
Penalty
Charge 1 and 2: $100,000
Maximum fine available
Charge 1: $300,000; Charge 2: $300,000
Professional and legal costs
$1,500
Court costs
$105.35
In default period
N/A
Time to pay
Referred to SPER
Conviction recorded
Yes