On 17 September 2026, a rock-climbing and trampolining business were sentenced in the Caboolture Magistrates Court for breaching section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) (‘the Act’). The defendant company pleaded guilty having failed to comply with its primary health and safety duty thereby exposing other persons to the risk of death or serious injury.

The defendant company operated an indoor rock-climbing and trampolining park. In undertaking activities within that park there was a risk of customers falling from height.

On 24 March 2025, a 10-year-old boy fell from a rock-climbing wall that was 8-10 metres high, sustaining a serious non-permanent injury which required hospitalisation. He was unsupervised whilst attempting to use an auto-belay system which is utilised to support the climber.

The defendant failed to:

1. Ensure supervision of persons at all times within the climbing wall area when using the area and climbing the walls.
2. Ensure that supervision was given to users of the area before they climbed walls in order to ensure that they use the carabiners and auto belay system correctly to minimise or eliminate the potential of falling whilst climbing the wall.

Following the incident, access to the rock-climbing wall was restricted by a locked gate, cameras were installed and changes were made to ensure the area was always supervised.

The Magistrate sentenced the defendant company, noting that the offending was low-medium range seriousness. General deterrence, denunciation and just punishment were highly relevant sentencing considerations.

It was an aggravating feature that the offending had caused harm and his Honour read out the victim impact statement of the child’s mother. In taking into account the sentencing considerations in the decision of Nash v Silver City Drilling (NSW) Pty Ltd, the Magistrate noted that the control measures that ought to have been in place were inexpensive and readily available. The risk was potentially catastrophic.

His Honour relied upon the decision of Work Health and Safety v Multisteps Pty Ltd [2026] QMC 17 and, in mitigation, took into account the early plea of guilty, lack of criminal history, cooperation with the administration of justice, written expression of remorse, and the financial peril of the business, which was potentially to go into liquidation, depending on the fine imposed. The defendant company submitted that a fine between $15,000 to $20,000 would be appropriate.

The Magistrate noted that the defendant company’s capacity to pay a fine was a relevant consideration, but was not a predominant consideration, as the fine could be referred to SPER.

Ultimately, His Honour imposed a fine of $90,000 and declined to record a conviction.

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