Citation: SafeWork NSW v Bhullar Steel Australia Pty Ltd [2025] NSWDC 72
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 20 March 2025
Judge: Scotting DCJ
Background
A steel processing and fabrication business operating from Auburn, New South Wales, was sentenced after pleading guilty to a Category 2 offence under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011. The prosecution arose from a serious workplace incident on 4 August 2021 in which a contracted machine operator was seriously injured.
On that day, a boilermaker engaged as an independent contractor instructed the machine operator to use a magnetic lifter and gantry crane to move a steel frame weighing approximately 633 kilograms. The magnetic lifter was in poor condition, showing discolouration, an illegible label, a bent lever arm, and a missing activation button. No assessment was conducted to determine whether the equipment was suitable for the task.
When the machine operator attempted to lift the steel frame a second time, the magnetic lifter detached and fell forward onto him, pinning him to the ground. He suffered crush injuries to his chest, left pelvis, and ribs, as well as a left pneumothorax (a collapsed lung).
Legal Issues
- Whether the offender had failed to comply with its primary health and safety duty under s 19(1) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011, exposing the worker to a risk of death or serious injury contrary to s 32 of that Act
- The appropriate penalty, including the objective seriousness of the offence and the relevance of aggravating and mitigating factors
- Whether a discount on the fine was warranted for the guilty plea, cooperation with investigators, remorse, and rehabilitation prospects
- The offender's capacity to pay a fine
Decision
The District Court convicted the offender on its guilty plea. The offence was established by a combination of serious systemic failures: the magnetic lifter was damaged and poorly maintained, no adequate system existed for selecting appropriate lifting equipment, there were no exclusion zones to protect workers from falling loads, supervision arrangements were unclear and poorly understood, and the worker had received no adequate training in crane operation or the use of magnetic attachments.
Scotting DCJ assessed the objective seriousness of the offence as falling in the mid-range. The consequences for the worker were severe, the risk was foreseeable, and guidance material on the safe use of magnetic lifters had been publicly available before the incident. The Court also noted that Mr Lalam's competence had never been assessed for these tasks and that the Safe Work Method Statement did not address magnetic lifting devices at all.
In mitigation, the Court accepted that the offender had no prior convictions, had cooperated with SafeWork NSW's investigation, had expressed genuine remorse through its director, had taken remedial steps following the incident, and had good prospects of rehabilitation. The offender's role as a provider of training opportunities for trade apprentices and international students was noted as indicative of good corporate citizenship.
The Court set a base fine of $360,000, reflecting the objective seriousness of the offence and the need for both general and specific deterrence, then reduced that amount by 25% to account for the utilitarian value of the early guilty plea. The offender did not contend it had a reduced capacity to pay.
Orders Made
- Bhullar Steel Australia Pty Ltd convicted of the offence under s 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011
- Fine of $270,000 imposed (base fine of $360,000, reduced by 25% for the guilty plea)
- Offender to pay the prosecutor's costs of the proceedings, as agreed or assessed
- Pursuant to s 122(2) of the Fines Act 1996, 50% of the fine to be paid to the prosecutor (SafeWork NSW)
Key Takeaways
- A fine of $270,000 was imposed on a steel fabricator whose worker was seriously injured when an inadequately maintained and unsuitable magnetic lifter detached during a crane lift, reflecting mid-range objective seriousness for a Category 2 WHS offence.
- Systemic failures across multiple areas, including deficient equipment inspection, absent exclusion zones, inadequate worker training, and an unclear supervision structure, collectively supported the finding of a serious breach of the primary duty under s 19(1) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011.
- A 25% discount on the base fine was applied for the guilty plea, consistent with the utilitarian discount principles in R v Thomson & Houlton and R v Borkowski.
- Where an offender does not raise limited capacity to pay, the court proceeds on the basis that full capacity exists, though capacity to pay remains relevant but not decisive in determining the appropriate fine amount.
- Genuine remorse, cooperation with the regulator, no prior convictions, and demonstrated rehabilitation steps each operated as distinct mitigating factors, even where some, such as remorse, overlapped with the significance of the guilty plea.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW), ss 19(1), 32
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A, 22
- Fines Act 1996 (NSW), ss 6, 122(2)
Cases:
- Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd v Nash [2016] NSWCCA 37
- Jahandideh v R [2014] NSWCCA 178
- R v Borkowski (2009) 195 A Crim R 1
- R v Thomson & Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383
- R v Youkhana [2004] NSWCCA 412