WHS Case Law in Australia: 21 Real Prosecutions, Real Fines, and the Lessons Every Construction Manager Must Know

We studied 71 prosecutions (WHS Case Law) in the last 20 months or so. We break down 21 of the most significant cases, what went wrong, and what each business must do differently.

 

Introduction

Australian WHS case law is sending a message that every construction manager, site supervisor, and PCBU needs to hear: the regulators are not slowing down, and the courts are not going easy, especially in Victoria and NSW. NSW is also going very heavy handed with FWC and Industrial Court litigation. NSW is also the only division regularly double dipping on offenses.

Only time will tell what havoc awaits us, after the digital works system bill comes in effect later this year. We are not a fan of that one.

Between April 2024 and March 2026, WHS regulators across four states prosecuted 71 cases, resulting in $27.6 million in combined penalties. 29 of those prosecutions involved a workplace fatality. The single largest fine was $1.5 million – handed down for Queensland’s third industrial manslaughter conviction. Two Category 1 reckless conduct convictions were recorded. And the industries getting hit hardest – construction, manufacturing, mining, meat processing – are the ones where most of you reading this spend your working lives.

Those 71 cases span New South Wales (31 cases), Queensland (15 cases), Western Australia (14 cases), and South Australia (11 cases). You can review the prosecution registers yourself: SafeWork NSW prosecutions, WorkSafe WA prosecutions, QLD Office of WHS Prosecutor court reports, and SafeWork SA prosecutions. What you will find there should concern you.

Here is what the raw numbers do not tell you: the 71 published prosecutions are only the ones that made it into the public record. Regulators publish selectively. The actual number of WHS investigations, improvement notices, prohibition notices, and enforceable undertakings issued in that same period is significantly higher. For every case that ends up in a courtroom, dozens are resolved behind closed doors through enforceable undertakings, agreed settlements, or simply dropped investigations where the evidence did not quite get over the line. The published register is the tip of the iceberg.

This article pulls out 21 of the most significant WHS prosecutions from that two-year period – the body of WHS case law that every construction manager needs. Together, they account for more than $12.7 million in penalties. We have selected them not just for their size but for the clarity of the WHS lessons they teach. Falls from height. Unguarded machinery. Crane and lifting failures. Missing safe work method statements. Pedestrian and vehicle separation breakdowns. Site security failures that killed children. These are the patterns, and they are the same patterns that a WHS compliance audit would pick up on your site tomorrow.

Every case in this article is real. Real names. Real penalties. Real people who went to work and did not come home. If you manage a construction site, run a business, or hold any PCBU obligations under the WHS Act, this WHS case law is required reading.

Master Data Table: All 21 Cases

#	Defendant	State	Penalty	Fatal?	Breach Type	Year
1	Narellan Pools Pty Ltd	QLD	$1,500,000	Yes	Industrial Manslaughter	2024
2	Orica Australia Pty Ltd	NSW	$1,200,000	No	Category 1 – Reckless Conduct	2024
3	RPC Surface Treatment Pty Ltd	WA	$975,000	Yes	Category 2 – Primary Duty	2025
4	Airdrill Pty Ltd	WA	$897,500	Yes	Multiple Duties (Death)	2025
5	W.A.S.S. Nominees Pty Ltd (WA Salt Group)	WA	$875,000	Yes	Plant Control (Death)	2025
6	JMA Engineering Pty Ltd	SA	$840,000	Yes	Category 1 – Reckless Conduct	2024
7	WAMMCO	WA	$785,000	Yes	Category 2 – Primary Duty	2025
8	AWB Contractors Pty Ltd	NSW	$765,000	Yes	Category 2 – Primary Duty	2025
9	QLD Mining Operation	QLD	$720,000	Yes	Multiple (GBH & Death)	2024
10	RUC Mining Contractors Pty Ltd	WA	$540,000	Yes	Category 2 – Primary Duty	2025
11	Avant Stone Pty Ltd	NSW	$450,000	Yes	Category 2 – Primary Duty	2024
12	State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd	NSW	$450,000	Yes	Category 2 – Primary Duty	2025
13	Crestville Holdings Pty Ltd (Sydney Indoor Climbing Gym)	NSW	$450,000	Yes	Category 2 – Third Party Duty	2025
14	State of Queensland (Responsible Agency)	QLD	$425,000	Yes	Category 2 – Primary Duty	2024
15	Pivotal Plant Pty Ltd	QLD	$400,000	Yes	Category 2 (Child Death)	2025
16	Mobile Scaffolds Queensland Pty Ltd	QLD	$400,000	Yes	Category 2 – Third Party Duty	2024
17	James Frizelle’s Automotive Group (Gold Coast Isuzu)	QLD	$400,000	Yes	Category 2 (Fatal Explosion)	2025
18	Owners Strata Plan 93899 / Chris Darby Strata	NSW	$375,000	Yes	Category 2 – Third Party Duty	2024
19	The Salvation Army (NSW) Property Trust	NSW	$300,000	Yes	Category 2 – Third Party Duty	2024
20	PTG Construction and Development Pty Ltd	WA	$18,000	Yes	Site Security Failure (Child Entry)	2024
21	AJ Bristow & Sons Pty Ltd (Bidmead)	NSW	Pending	Yes	Primary Duty / Evidence Interference	202

Case-by-Case Analysis

1. Narellan Pools Pty Ltd – QLD – $1,500,000

The Incident

A worker died at a pool construction site operated by Narellan Pools in Queensland. The death was not the result of a freak accident or an unforeseeable chain of events. The court described the safety oversights as “flagrant and glaring” – language that signals complete systemic failure, not a single missed step.

The judgment was handed down on 14 June 2024. This was Queensland’s third industrial manslaughter conviction, and the $1.5 million penalty set the bar for how seriously courts will treat WHS Act breaches where safety culture is absent from the top down.

The significance of this case goes beyond the fine. Industrial manslaughter is the most serious WHS offence in Australia. In Queensland, it applies when a senior officer’s conduct causes a worker’s death and that conduct amounts to criminal negligence. It is not a civil penalty. It is a criminal conviction. For PCBUs, that means potential jail time for individuals and penalties in the millions for the business. Queensland was the first Australian jurisdiction to enact industrial manslaughter laws, and the courts are now applying them with the full force the legislation intended.

What the Court Found

Narellan Pools was convicted under the industrial manslaughter provisions of the WHS Act 2011 (Qld). The PCBU failed to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health and safety of workers. The court found that the safety oversights were not incidental – they were embedded in how the company operated day to day. The phrase “flagrant and glaring” tells you everything: this was not about a missing sign or an overdue inspection. The entire safety management system was either absent or a fiction.

The QLD Office of WHS Prosecutor published this as one of the most significant WHS prosecution outcomes of 2024, and it should be treated that way by every PCBU in the country.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Industrial manslaughter laws are no longer theoretical. A $1.5 million conviction proves PCBUs face criminal accountability when safety failures are systemic and deliberate.
• Courts distinguish between an isolated lapse and a culture that ignores safety. The phrase “flagrant and glaring” is now on the record, and it will be cited in future prosecutions. If your safety management system exists only on paper, you are exposed.
• Every PCBU operating in Queensland – and in any jurisdiction with industrial manslaughter provisions – must treat safety as a board-level accountability issue. Directors and senior officers carry personal liability.
• If your workers cannot point to a written, current SWMS for every high-risk task they perform, you have a gap that a prosecutor can drive a truck through.

If your safety management system has not been reviewed in the last 12 months, you are operating on borrowed time. HSE Direct can audit your entire SMS against what courts are actually prosecuting.

2. Orica Australia Pty Ltd – NSW – $1,200,000

The Incident

This case is different from every other prosecution on this list, and that is exactly why it matters. Workers at Orica’s Kooragang Island chemical manufacturing facility were exposed to cobalt dust for more than five years. Not five days. Not five weeks. Five years of breathing in a substance known to cause occupational lung disease.

The result was cobalt-induced lung sensitisation – a chronic condition that does not heal. The judgment was handed down on 1 May 2024. At the time, the $1.2 million penalty was the highest WHS fine ever recorded in New South Wales.

Most construction managers think about WHS in terms of falls, crush injuries, and falling objects – the sudden, visible hazards. Orica proves that chronic health exposure carries the same criminal culpability, and the penalties can be even higher. If your workers are breathing in silica dust, welding fumes, solvent vapours, or asbestos fibres, this case applies directly to you.

What the Court Found

Orica was convicted of a Category 1 offence under WHS Act 2011 (NSW) s31(1) read with s19(1). Category 1 is the most serious non-manslaughter charge available – it requires proof of reckless conduct. The court found that Orica recklessly exposed workers to cobalt dust without adequate atmospheric monitoring, exposure controls, or health surveillance.

Five years of exposure without intervention is not a mistake. It is recklessness. The SafeWork NSW prosecution register records this as one of the defining Category 1 prosecutions in Australian WHS case law.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Chronic occupational disease is prosecuted criminally, not just through workers’ compensation. If your workers develop a condition linked to workplace exposure, you face the same prosecution pathway as a company whose worker fell off a scaffold.
• Atmospheric monitoring, workplace exposure standards, and health surveillance programs are mandatory in any environment where workers are exposed to airborne hazards. Their absence is direct evidence of recklessness.
• Construction sites generate dust constantly – silica from concrete cutting, timber dust, welding fumes, paint vapours. If you are not monitoring and controlling exposure, you are building the same liability that cost Orica $1.2 million.
• Health hazards are invisible but prosecutable. Make occupational hygiene part of your regular site audits.

If you are unsure whether your site’s dust and fume controls meet current standards, HSE Direct’s WHS consulting services can assess your exposure risks and build a monitoring program before a regulator does it for you.

3. RPC Surface Treatment Pty Ltd – WA – $975,000

The Incident

A 16-year-old worker at an industrial spray-painting and sandblasting facility in Welshpool, Western Australia, was fatally crushed by a 425kg steel beam that fell from an overhead monorail. The beam struck the teenager and killed him.

That alone is devastating. But the detail that turns this case into one of the most damning WHS prosecutions in recent memory is this: the regulator had already issued a prohibition notice for the same hazard. The business received the notice. They knew the monorail system was dangerous. And they kept operating it with workers underneath, including a 16-year-old child.

The judgment was handed down on 23 October 2025. The $975,000 workplace safety fine reflected both the severity of the failure and the fact that the business had been explicitly warned and chose to ignore the warning.

 

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• A prohibition notice is not a suggestion. It is a legal order to cease a dangerous activity. Ignoring it does not just increase your fine – it turns a WHS prosecution into an unwinnable case.
• Employing workers under 18 requires heightened risk controls. Young workers lack the experience, confidence, and authority to refuse unsafe work. The duty to protect them is entirely on the PCBU.
• Overhead monorail systems, crane rails, and any mechanism carrying suspended loads must have engineered fall-arrest controls and exclusion zones. No worker – let alone a teenager – should be standing under an uncontrolled suspended load.
• If your business has received any form of regulator notice – improvement notice, prohibition notice, or verbal direction – treat it as the single highest priority item on your compliance list.

If you have received a prohibition or improvement notice and are not sure how to close it out properly, HSE Direct works with businesses across Australia to respond to regulator actions and get compliant fast.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• No worker should ever stand on, ride on, or position themselves under a suspended load. This is a non-negotiable rule, and it must be enforced through physical controls, not just verbal warnings.
• Every lift – routine or non-routine – must have a documented risk assessment, including verification that the crane’s safe working load exceeds the actual weight being lifted, with margin.
• “We’ve always done it this way” is an admission of systemic negligence in court, not a defence. If your crew is performing ad hoc lifts without paperwork, you are one bad lift away from a prosecution like this one.
• Crane operators must hold the appropriate high-risk work licences and must refuse to perform any lift that has not been risk-assessed.

If your lifting procedures have not been reviewed against current standards, HSE Direct can help you build documented lift plans and SWMS that will hold up under regulatory scrutiny.

5. W.A.S.S. Nominees Pty Ltd (WA Salt Group) – WA – $875,000

The Incident

An experienced plant operator at WA Salt Group’s North Coogee facility was caught in a salt pit conveyor mechanism and fatally injured. The worker was performing routine tasks near an unguarded conveyor when entanglement occurred. The conveyor mechanism lacked adequate guarding, and isolation procedures were either absent or not enforced.

This case was the first fatality prosecution under Western Australia’s WHS Act 2020 – the new legislative framework that replaced the older Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984. The judgment on 24 April 2025 set the tone for how WA courts would apply the new Act.

What the Court Found

W.A.S.S. Nominees was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2020 (WA) ss21(2) and 31(1). The PCBU failed to ensure that plant used in the workplace was without risks to health and safety, so far as reasonably practicable. The unguarded rotating mechanism was a foreseeable and preventable hazard. The fact that the worker was experienced changed nothing in the court’s analysis – the PCBU duty of care does not diminish because a worker has been doing the job for years.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Experience does not protect workers from unguarded machinery. An “experienced operator” argument carries zero weight in court. The duty to guard plant is on the PCBU, regardless of who is operating it.
• Every conveyor, auger, and rotating mechanism must have fixed guarding that prevents access to nip points, entanglement zones, and in-running nips. If a body part can reach the moving parts, the guarding is inadequate. The workplace safety fines for unguarded plant are climbing every year.
• Lock-out/tag-out (LOTO) procedures for maintenance and cleaning of conveyors are mandatory. If your operators bypass isolation to “save time,” you need to fix the culture before a regulator or a coroner does.

If your plant guarding has not been assessed against AS 4024 (Safety of Machinery), HSE Direct can conduct a plant safety audit and identify gaps before they become a prosecution.

6. JMA Engineering Pty Ltd – SA – $840,000

The SafeWork SA prosecution register records this as the first Category 1 conviction in the state’s history – a significant marker in Australian WHS case law.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• A defective crane cable was flagged twice and ignored twice. That sequence of events alone was enough for a Category 1 reckless conduct conviction. If your pre-start inspections identify a defect, the plant must be taken out of service immediately. No exceptions.
• Apprentices and young workers cannot be expected to refuse unsafe work. The PCBU duty of care is heightened when vulnerable workers are involved. Courts will factor this into sentencing.
• Crane pre-operational inspections and cable inspection registers must be maintained and acted upon. A register that identifies defects but triggers no corrective action is worse than no register at all – it is a written record of your recklessness.
• Standing under suspended loads must be prohibited by policy and enforced by physical exclusion zones. Verbal instructions are not enough.

If your crane inspection records show open defects that have not been actioned, that is a ticking prosecution. HSE Direct can review your plant inspection and maintenance programs and build systems that actually close the loop on identified hazards.

7. WAMMCO – WA – $785,000

The Incident

A worker at WAMMCO’s Katanning abattoir was entangled in a rotating “cake press” mechanism in the rendering shed and suffered fatal injuries. The rendering equipment lacked adequate guarding around the rotating press. Isolation procedures were either absent or routinely bypassed during operations.

The judgment was handed down on 27 August 2025. Meat processing and rendering environments are among the most dangerous workplaces in Australia – wet floors, high-energy rotating equipment, confined spaces, time pressure, and a workforce that often includes vulnerable or transient workers.

What the Court Found

WAMMCO was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2020 (WA) ss19(1) and 31(1). The PCBU failed to ensure that the plant used in the workplace was without risks to the health and safety of workers. The unguarded rotating mechanism was a foreseeable and preventable hazard. The WHS Act breach was straightforward: open rotating equipment, no guarding, no isolation, one dead worker.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Open hoppers on rotating processing machinery require fixed guarding with interlocked access. A cake press in a rendering shed is exactly the type of equipment that must have guarding compliant with AS 4024.
• Meat processing environments combine multiple high-risk factors. Safety systems must be designed for actual conditions – wet floors, slippery surfaces, high noise, shift fatigue – not laboratory conditions.
• Any machine with an exposed rotating element must have a documented LOTO procedure. If operators can bypass isolation without triggering an alarm or interlock, the system is not fit for purpose.

If your facility has rotating machinery without interlocked guarding, do not wait for an incident to fix it. HSE Direct can assess your machine guarding compliance and recommend engineered solutions.

8. AWB Contractors Pty Ltd – NSW – $765,000

The Incident

A worker was fatally crushed at Rozelle Bay, Sydney, when crane cables snapped during the lifting of a submerged yacht. AWB Contractors had not conducted a risk assessment for the complex marine salvage operation. The crane was being operated beyond its rated capacity. The weight of a submerged vessel is inherently uncertain – water absorption, sediment accumulation, and structural degradation all add to the load in ways that cannot be estimated by looking at it.

The judgment was delivered on 23 July 2025. The $765,000 workplace safety fine reflected both the culpability and the complete absence of any planning for a lift that was obviously high-risk.

What the Court Found

AWB Contractors was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (NSW) s32 read with s19(1). No risk assessment was conducted. The crane was operated over capacity. No safe work method statement existed for the salvage lift. The SafeWork NSW prosecution register lists this as one of the most significant crane-related WHS prosecution outcomes in NSW.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Marine and salvage lifts involve unknown weights. Submerged objects absorb water, accumulate sediment, and may have hidden structural damage. The safe working load must account for worst-case scenarios, not best guesses.
• Every non-routine lift must have a specific SWMS, an engineer-certified lift plan, and a qualified rigger on site. Generic crane procedures are not sufficient for complex lifts.
• If the weight of the load is unknown or uncertain, the lift must not proceed until the weight is verified or the crane capacity is derated to account for the uncertainty.
• The $765,000 penalty reflects a court that had no mitigating evidence to work with – no risk assessment, no SWMS, no lift plan. Give the court something to work with. Better yet, give your workers a safe system to work within.

If your business conducts non-routine or complex lifts and your SWMS library does not cover each specific scenario, HSE Direct can help you develop lift-specific procedures that protect your workers and your business.

9. QLD Mining Operation – QLD – $720,000

The Incident

A Queensland mining operation was fined $720,000 for causing grievous bodily harm and death to workers through multiple safety failures. The prosecution was not about a single incident – it addressed systemic failures across the operation. When safety management systems break down in mining, the consequences are measured in multiple casualties.

The judgment was delivered on 24 June 2024. The aggregated penalty reflects the court’s view that systemic mine safety failures warrant cumulative sentencing.

What the Court Found

The mine operator was convicted of multiple breaches under the Mining Safety Acts (Qld). The failures spanned multiple operations and resulted in both fatal and serious injury outcomes. The QLD Office of WHS Prosecutor published this as a significant prosecution, reinforcing that mining-specific legislation carries heavy maximum penalties and prescriptive requirements.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Mining carries the highest regulatory penalties in Australia. A $720,000 fine for multiple fatalities and grievous bodily harm is the court’s message that systemic failures in mining will attract cumulative sentencing.
• Mining-specific legislation often has higher maximum penalties and more prescriptive requirements than general WHS Acts. Compliance requires specialist mine safety professionals, not general WHS advisors.
• Safety management systems in mining must integrate hazard identification, risk assessment, incident investigation, and corrective action into a continuous loop – not a static document that sits in a folder.

If your mining operation’s safety management system has not been independently reviewed in the past 12 months, you are running blind. Contact HSE Direct for a mining safety system review.

10. RUC Mining Contractors Pty Ltd – WA – $540,000

The Incident

A senior driller was killed while disassembling a drill string reamer at the St Ives Gold Mine near Kambalda, Western Australia. The disassembly procedure involved stored energy in the drill string – a known and well-documented hazard in raisebore drilling. The worker was training an offsider at the time. The procedure was being performed without adequate controls for the stored energy release.

The judgment was handed down on 5 September 2025. The trainer died doing the work while simultaneously trying to teach someone else how to do it – a situation that should never exist for a high-risk task with uncontrolled energy.

What the Court Found

RUC Mining Contractors was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2020 (WA) ss19(1) and 32(1). The PCBU failed to ensure safe procedures for raisebore drill string disassembly, which involves significant stored mechanical energy. The central failure was the absence of a safe work procedure for this specific high-risk task.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Stored energy in drill strings, hydraulic systems, and pressurised equipment must be identified, assessed, and controlled before any disassembly begins. This is a fundamental principle that applies across every industry, not just mining.
• Training must never occur on live high-risk tasks without a validated, step-by-step procedure and direct supervision by a competent person who is not simultaneously performing the work. The trainer cannot be the operator.
• If a task involves stored mechanical energy and there is no written procedure for it, the task must not proceed.

If your high-risk work procedures do not specifically address stored energy hazards, HSE Direct can review your SWMS library and fill the gaps.

Amanda Hogan and her children at a miners’ memorial service in Kalgoorlie-Boulder in 2023.

11. Avant Stone Pty Ltd – NSW – $450,000

The Incident

A worker at Avant Stone’s Beresfield facility in the Hunter Valley was moving stone slabs using an overhead crane when two slabs fell, causing fatal crush injuries. The rigging was inadequate for the weight and shape of the slabs. No exclusion zone had been established beneath the suspended load. No tag lines were in use.

The judgment was handed down on 31 October 2024. The $450,000 penalty included a publication order – meaning Avant Stone was required to publicise its conviction, adding reputational damage to the financial penalty.

Anton Bauer, 56, was crushed to death underneath two stone slabs that weighed more than 600kg after they fell at Avant Stone’s Beresfield warehouse in Sydney.

What the Court Found

Avant Stone was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (NSW) s32 read with s19(1). The PCBU failed to ensure the health and safety of workers during overhead crane operations involving heavy stone slabs. Inadequate rigging, no tag lines, and no exclusion zones were the primary failures.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Stone slabs are smooth-surfaced, heavy, and prone to shifting during a lift. Generic rigging methods do not work. Custom lifting attachments and engineered rigging solutions are required for this type of load.
• Exclusion zones beneath all suspended loads must be physically barricaded or controlled by a designated dogger. Verbal instructions to “stay clear” are not a control measure.
• Publication orders add reputational damage that can affect a business far more than the fine itself. Clients, insurers, and contract partners all see the conviction.

If your rigging and lifting procedures rely on operator judgment rather than documented methods and engineered controls, that is a gap a WHS compliance audit from HSE Direct will identify.

12. State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd – NSW – $450,000

The Incident

A worker was fatally run over by a large dump truck at a road works site. There was no traffic management plan. No spotter was assigned. The worker was in the vehicle’s blind spot. The fatal run-over occurred during routine operations – the most common scenario for vehicle-pedestrian incidents on construction sites in Australia.

The judgment was delivered on 21 March 2025. Vehicle-pedestrian interaction is the single biggest killer on Australian construction sites, and this WHS prosecution Australia case is a textbook example of why.

What the Court Found

State Asphalt Services was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (NSW) s32 read with s19(1). The PCBU failed to implement a traffic management plan, failed to provide a spotter for reversing heavy vehicles, and allowed pedestrian workers to operate in proximity to mobile plant without any form of physical separation or control.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Vehicle-pedestrian interaction is the number one cause of construction fatalities in Australia. Physical separation – barriers, exclusion zones, designated pedestrian corridors – is the only reliable control.
• Every site must have a site-specific traffic management plan (TMP) that addresses reversing, blind spots, pedestrian access, and signalling. Generic plans copied from another site are not compliant.
• Spotters must be assigned for every reversing movement of heavy vehicles on active work sites. Relying on mirrors and reversing cameras alone is not enough.
• If your TMP is more than six months old and the site layout has changed, it is no longer valid.

If your site does not have a current, site-specific traffic management plan, get one built before someone gets killed. HSE Direct develops traffic management plans and conducts site-specific risk assessments for vehicle-pedestrian interaction.

13. Crestville Holdings Pty Ltd (Sydney Indoor Climbing Gym) – NSW – $450,000

The Incident

A 27-year-old visitor fell 13 metres from an assisted rope climbing wall at a Sydney indoor climbing gym and died. The gym’s safety management system for the climbing wall was inadequate. The assisted belay device either failed or was improperly maintained. The operator had not implemented sufficient checks, training, or equipment inspection protocols for the safety-critical systems that stood between a paying customer and a 13-metre fall.

The judgment was delivered on 8 August 2025. This WHS prosecution Australia case is significant because it was brought under the third-party duty provisions – the obligation a PCBU owes to members of the public, not just workers.

What the Court Found

Crestville Holdings was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (NSW) s32 read with s19(2) – the third-party duty. The PCBU failed to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, that the health and safety of other persons (visitors and customers) was not put at risk from the conduct of the business. The prosecution under the third-party limb of s19 extends PCBU obligations beyond employees to every person who enters the premises.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• If your business invites the public onto your premises – for recreation, retail, or any other purpose – you owe them the same PCBU duty of care as you owe your workers. The third-party duty under s19(2) is being enforced aggressively.
• Equipment inspection regimes for safety-critical recreational equipment must be documented, manufacturer-compliant, and independently audited. Self-assessment is not sufficient for belay devices, auto-belay units, harnesses, and height safety systems.
• This case applies well beyond climbing gyms. Any construction site where members of the public could be affected – pedestrians near scaffolding, residents near demolition, traffic near road works – triggers the same third-party PCBU obligations.

If your business has public-facing operations and you are unsure of your PCBU obligations to third parties, get advice before you have an incident.

14. State of Queensland (Responsible Agency) – QLD – $425,000

The Incident

A worker died while deploying a Tyre Deflation Device (TDD) during an operational deployment. The responsible Queensland government agency had known about training deficiencies related to TDD deployment for 10 years. Multiple near-miss notifications had been filed over that decade. Despite 10 years of internal warnings, the training system was never fixed.

The judgment was handed down on 18 November 2024. This is one of the rare cases where the State itself was the defendant, proving that government agencies are PCBUs with the same WHS obligations as private employers.

What the Court Found

The State of Queensland was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (Qld) ss19(1) and 32. The PCBU failed to provide adequate training, instruction, and information to workers performing a high-risk operational task. The training gap had been documented internally for a decade. This was not oversight. It was wilful inaction over 10 years.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Near-miss reports are early warnings. A decade of near-misses without corrective action is direct evidence of a failure to manage risk, and courts will use that evidence to maximum effect at sentencing.
• Government agencies are PCBUs. Crown immunity does not extend to WHS obligations. The State can be prosecuted and fined like any private employer.
• Training programs that look good on paper but do not prepare workers for real-world conditions create criminal liability. If your training has not been tested in realistic scenarios, it is untested.
• If your near-miss register shows repeated reports about the same hazard, and your corrective action column is empty, you are building a prosecutor’s case for them.

If your training records and near-miss registers show gaps, address them now. HSE Direct can audit your training programs and near-miss response systems against what regulators are actually prosecuting.

15. Pivotal Plant Pty Ltd – QLD – $400,000

The Incident

A 16-year-old volunteer child worker was struck and run over by unmanned machinery at a Beenleigh construction and plant hire facility. The child was not supervised. There were no procedures governing volunteers or minors on site. The machinery had been left unattended and operational – no keys removed, no brakes locked, no isolation.

The judgment was delivered on 25 July 2025. The combination of a minor, zero supervision, and unmanned operational plant maximised the court’s assessment of culpability.

What the Court Found

Pivotal Plant was convicted of breaching the WHS Act 2011 (Qld) – primary duty. The PCBU failed to ensure the health and safety of a worker (volunteer), failed to supervise a minor, and failed to secure plant when not in active use. The court applied heightened judicial scrutiny due to the volunteer and child worker status of the victim.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Volunteers are “workers” under WHS law if they carry out work for the business. Their WHS protections are identical to those of paid employees. There is no reduced duty for volunteer labour.
• All plant must be secured when not under the direct control of a competent operator – keys removed, brakes engaged, isolators locked. Unmanned operational machinery is an immediate prohibition-notice-level hazard.
• If minors are present on your site in any capacity – volunteer, work experience, family visit – you need specific procedures for their supervision and the additional risks they face.
• A $400,000 workplace safety fine for a child volunteer killed by unmanned plant sends a clear message: the courts will not tolerate casual attitudes to site access and plant security.

If you use volunteers, work experience students, or allow anyone under 18 on your site, make sure your procedures explicitly address their safety. HSE Direct can help you build compliant volunteer and young worker management procedures.

16. Mobile Scaffolds Queensland Pty Ltd – QLD – $400,000

The Incident

A scaffold tower erected by Mobile Scaffolds Queensland collapsed and fell onto a bystander, killing them. The company was sentenced in absentia – it did not appear at trial. The death of a member of the public, rather than a worker, brought the prosecution under the third-party duty provisions of the WHS Act.

The judgment was handed down on 16 August 2024.

What the Court Found

Mobile Scaffolds Queensland was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (Qld) s19(2) – the third-party duty. The PCBU failed to ensure that the health and safety of other persons was not put at risk from the conduct of the scaffolding business. The scaffold was inadequately secured, braced, or erected in a manner that exposed the public to foreseeable risk of collapse.

Sentencing in absentia means the company forfeited every opportunity to present mitigating evidence, early guilty plea discounts, or evidence of remediation. The court sentenced on the prosecution’s case alone. This WHS prosecution Australia outcome is a warning to every scaffolding contractor in the country.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Your liability follows your equipment. A scaffold you erect on someone else’s site that collapses and kills a bystander is your prosecution, not theirs. Third-party exposure is prosecuted with the same seriousness as worker exposure.
• Scaffold erection, modification, and dismantling must comply with AS/NZS 1576 and be performed under the supervision of a licensed scaffolder. Inadequate bracing or base plate installation on public-facing scaffolds is a public safety hazard.
• Failing to appear in court does not reduce your penalty. It increases it by removing your ability to present mitigating evidence.
• Every scaffold on or adjacent to a public area requires specific risk assessment for public exposure, including catch platforms, debris netting, and exclusion fencing.

If your scaffolding systems have not been inspected and certified against AS/NZS 1576, that is a compliance gap that needs closing now. Contact HSE Direct for a scaffold safety review.

17. James Frizelle’s Automotive Group (Gold Coast Isuzu) – QLD – $400,000

The Incident

A fatal explosion occurred at a Gold Coast car dealership operated by James Frizelle’s Automotive Group, killing a worker. The explosion happened during routine workshop operations. Most people do not think of car dealerships as high-risk workplaces. This case proves otherwise.

The judgment was delivered on 23 May 2025.

What the Court Found

James Frizelle’s Automotive Group was convicted of breaching the WHS Act 2011 (Qld) – primary duty. The PCBU failed to manage the risk of explosion in the workshop environment, including hazardous substance controls, ignition source management, and ventilation in confined or semi-confined spaces.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• An explosion at an automotive dealership killed a worker and resulted in a $400,000 WHS Act breach penalty. Hazardous work in non-industrial settings – service pits, tyre bays, body shops – carries full PCBU obligations.
• Fuel vapours, battery gases, compressed air, and chemical storage in automotive workshops all require formal hazardous substance management. Many dealerships underestimate these risks because the front of the building looks like retail.
• Explosion risk assessments must be conducted for any area where flammable vapours, gases, or dust may accumulate – even in environments that do not feel like traditional heavy industry.

If your workshop operations involve any flammable or explosive substances and you have not conducted a formal risk assessment, fix that today.

18. Owners Strata Plan 93899 / Chris Darby Strata – NSW – $375,000v

The Incident

A damaged security gate at a Berkeley strata property collapsed onto a 64-year-old concrete finisher, killing him. The gate had been in a state of disrepair. The strata manager and owners corporation knew about the gate’s condition. They did not repair or replace it. A man died because a gate that everyone knew was broken was left in service.

The judgment was handed down on 11 July 2024. The prosecution was brought under s20(2) – the duty of a person with management or control of a workplace.

What the Court Found

The defendants were convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (NSW) s32 read with s20(2). The person with management or control of the workplace failed to ensure that the workplace was without risks to the health and safety of any person. A known structural defect – a damaged gate – was not remediated.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Strata managers and body corporates are PCBUs when contractors or visitors attend common property. Maintenance of gates, doors, barriers, and structural elements is a WHS obligation, not just a building management issue.
• A known structural defect that could cause injury must be isolated, barricaded, or repaired immediately. Deferring maintenance to the next AGM is not a defence.
• This case applies to any construction manager working on or near strata properties. If you identify a hazardous condition on a client’s premises, you have a duty to report it and manage the risk – even if it is “their” property.

If your strata or property management clients are not across their WHS obligations, refer them to HSE Direct for a premises safety assessment.

19. The Salvation Army (NSW) Property Trust – NSW – $300,000v

The Incident

A 76-year-old aged care resident fell from a patient lifting hoist when the spreader bar released during a transfer. The resident subsequently died from injuries sustained in the fall. The hoist was being used as part of routine care. The failure was attributed to equipment maintenance deficiencies and inadequate staff training on hoist operation.

The judgment was delivered on 20 December 2024. Aged care is not the first industry most people associate with WHS prosecution Australia cases, but this conviction proves that the duty extends to every PCBU in every sector.

What the Court Found

The Salvation Army (NSW) Property Trust was convicted of breaching WHS Act 2011 (NSW) s32 read with s19(2) – the third-party duty. The aged care facility failed to ensure the health and safety of persons other than workers (residents) who may be affected by the conduct of the business. Equipment inspection and maintenance regimes were deficient. Staff training on the specific hoist model was inadequate.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Aged care facilities owe a PCBU duty of care to residents under s19(2). A failed hoist procedure killed a resident. Operators cannot outsource or delegate this responsibility.
• Patient lifting equipment – hoists, spreader bars, slings – must be inspected, maintained, and tested according to manufacturer specifications. A maintenance gap on a spreader bar latch is a foreseeable fatality risk.
• This case matters for construction managers because the same principles apply to any lifting or hoisting equipment on your site. If your spreader bars, shackles, and slings are not on a documented inspection schedule, you share the same risk profile as this aged care facility.

If your lifting equipment maintenance records are not current and complete, fix them before your next site inspection.

20. PTG Construction and Development Pty Ltd – WA – $18,000

The Incident

A 12-year-old boy entered an unsecured residential construction site in Maddington, Western Australia, through gaps in the perimeter fencing and suffered fatal injuries. The site had known perimeter security deficiencies – fence panels were missing, creating gaps that allowed public access to an active construction zone with open trenches, unfinished structures, and exposed hazards.

The judgment was delivered on 26 August 2024.

The $18,000 fine is the lowest on this list by a wide margin. But the dollar figure is not the story here, and any construction manager who looks at this case and thinks “that’s a cheap fine” has missed the point entirely.

A child is dead. A 12-year-old boy walked onto a building site because the fence had gaps. He did not walk onto a mine site or a chemical plant. He walked onto a residential construction site – the kind of site that thousands of builders operate across Australia every day. The fine was $18,000 because the charge was a regulatory breach under WHS (General) Regulations 2022 (WA) reg298(1) – failure to secure a construction site to prevent unauthorised entry – rather than a primary duty offence. The maximum penalty for that regulation is limited.

But think about the reputational cost. The human cost. The fact that this builder’s name is now permanently associated with a child’s death on an unsecured site. Think about the coronial inquest, the civil liability, the insurance consequences, and the fact that every future tender will require disclosure of this conviction. The $18,000 fine is the least of it.

What the Court Found

PTG Construction was convicted of breaching WHS (General) Regulations 2022 (WA) reg298(1). The builder failed to maintain the site perimeter fencing in a condition that would prevent public access, particularly by children, who are naturally attracted to construction sites.

The WorkSafe WA prosecution register records this as a significant site security prosecution.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Site security protects members of the public, not just workers. Every residential construction site must maintain 1.8m temporary fencing with locked gates, daily perimeter inspections, and immediate repair of any damage or gaps.
• Open sites near schools, parks, or residential areas are especially high-risk for child entry. Children are attracted to construction sites. Your fence is the only thing between curiosity and a fatality.
• Daily perimeter inspections must be documented. If a fence panel is missing or damaged, it must be replaced or secured before work begins that day. Not tomorrow. Not when the next delivery arrives. Today.
• The low fine does not reflect the true cost. A child’s death, a coronial inquest, civil proceedings, insurance claims, and permanent reputational damage are all consequences that dwarf any regulatory penalty.

If your site fencing and security procedures are not documented and enforced daily, fix them this week. It costs almost nothing to maintain a fence. It costs everything to explain why you did not.

21. SafeWork NSW v AJ Bristow & Sons Pty Ltd (Bidmead) – NSW – Pending

What the Court Found

The prosecution was brought under WHS Act 2011 (NSW) ss 19 and 32 (primary duty) and s155 (duty not to interfere with evidence). AJ Bristow & Sons, as the principal contractor, is alleged to have failed to ensure the health and safety of workers and subcontractors during heritage restoration involving cantilevered structural stonework.

The interlocutory decision addressed the admissibility of expert evidence from four experts – Bill Jordan, Phillip Martin, Martin Dwyer, and Mikhail Kogan. The defendant challenged the admissibility of these reports under Evidence Act 1995 ss 76, 79, and 135-137. Taylor J (President) of the NSW Industrial Court held all four expert reports admissible. This ruling signals that WHS prosecutors can deploy significant technical evidence in prosecutions, and defendants must be prepared to engage equally qualified experts and challenge methodology, not just credentials.

The key question in this case – the duty of a principal contractor to ensure the structural safety of heritage building elements before allowing subcontractor access – has implications for every builder and principal contractor working on heritage or older buildings across Australia.

WHS Lessons for Construction Managers

• Principal contractors bear direct responsibility for the safety of subcontractors on their sites. You cannot subcontract out the hazard and assume the subcontractor will manage it. If a heritage stone facade is structurally unsound, the principal contractor must ensure it is assessed before anyone works near it.
• Heritage restoration involves unique hazards that generic SWMS do not cover. Cantilevered stones, degraded mortar, unknown structural loads, and original building elements that predate modern engineering standards all require specialist engineering assessment before work begins.
• The admissibility of all four expert reports signals a prosecutorial approach that leans heavily on technical evidence. If your WHS practices are ever challenged, the evidence will be technical, detailed, and expert-led. Your defence must be equally rigorous.
• The s155 charge – duty not to interfere with evidence – adds a separate dimension of liability. Post-incident evidence management is a legal obligation, not a suggestion.

If your business works on heritage buildings, older structures, or any project involving structural elements of unknown integrity, generic SWMS are not enough. Get specialist advice before the work starts, not after something goes wrong.

What These 21 Cases Tell Us About Where the Regulators Are Looking

Across these 21 WHS prosecutions, clear patterns emerge. If you manage a construction site or hold PCBU obligations, these are the areas where you are most likely to be prosecuted if something goes wrong.

The most prosecuted failure types:

• Falls from height and falling objects – stone slabs, steel beams, cantilevered masonry
• Unguarded machinery – conveyors, rendering presses, rotating equipment without LOTO
• Crane and lifting failures – over-capacity lifts, faulty cables, no risk assessments, no exclusion zones, workers standing on loads
• Missing or inadequate SWMS – particularly for non-routine, complex, or high-risk tasks
• Pedestrian and vehicle separation failures – dump trucks, mobile plant, no traffic management plans
• Site security failures – unsecured fencing allowing public and child access

The industries getting hit hardest:

• Construction (residential, commercial, civil, marine salvage, heritage restoration)
• Manufacturing (steel fabrication, stone processing, spray painting, sandblasting)
• Mining (underground and surface, raisebore drilling, multiple-fatality operations)
• Meat processing (abattoir rendering, rotating equipment entanglement)

The patterns courts punish hardest:

• Known hazards that were not addressed – defective crane cables flagged twice, prohibition notices ignored, damaged fences left unrepaired, 10 years of near-misses without corrective action
• Prior warnings from regulators that were ignored
• Young, vulnerable, or inexperienced workers harmed – apprentices, 16-year-old employees, child volunteers, aged care residents
• Complete absence of documentation – no SWMS, no risk assessment, no lift plan, no traffic management plan

Every one of these 21 cases involved a hazard that was known, or should have been known, before the incident occurred. That is the pattern that should keep every construction manager up at night. These were not freak accidents. They were foreseeable failures. And the courts are prosecuting them with increasing severity. The WHS case law record is now deep enough to predict exactly what regulators will target next.

WHS case law in Australia is moving in one direction: higher penalties, broader application of PCBU duty of care, more aggressive use of industrial manslaughter provisions, and a willingness to prosecute government agencies, aged care facilities, recreation operators, and strata managers alongside traditional construction and mining defendants.

If your safety management systems cannot demonstrate that you have identified, assessed, and controlled the hazards on your site – with documentation that proves it – you are vulnerable to exactly the kind of prosecution detailed in every case above.

Don’t Wait for a Regulator’s Visit to Get Your WHS House in Order

HSE Direct works with construction companies, PCBUs, and site managers across NSW and Australia to build and audit safety management systems, develop SWMS, deliver toolbox talks, and prepare for SafeWork inspections.

The 21 cases in this article all had one thing in common: the hazard was known, or should have been known, before the incident. Don’t be the next case study.

Contact HSE Direct today to book a WHS compliance audit or site safety review.