|Defendant||Haysdale Nominees Pty Ltd|
|Trading Name||Not Applicable|
|Section||19(1)(b)  and 19(3) |
|Offence Date||Saturday, 4 May 1996|
|Description of Breach(es)||
 Being an employer, failed to provide and maintain, so far as was practicable, a working environment in which its employees were not exposed to hazards in that it failed to provide such instruction to its employees as was necessary to enable them to perform their work in such a manner that they were not exposed to hazards.
 Being the employer of an employee who, at the workplace, incurred an injury that was of the kind prescribed in Regulation 201 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1988 made under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984, failed to forthwith notify the Commissioner of WorkSafe Western Australia in the prescribed form giving such particulars as are prescribed.
The company was responsible for laying sewerage pipes in a new subdivision in Dunsborough.
At the time of the accident the injured person was working in a trench approximately 3 metres in depth. He was in a bent over position lining up sewerage pipes with a laser when an excavator struck him from behind.
It was necessary for the defendant to instruct its employees to ensure that if an employee was to work within the excavation that the person working in the excavation and the excavator operator had discussed what work was to be done in the excavation, that the person working in the excavation was within the view of the excavator operator at all times and that the excavator operator and person working in the excavation had agreed upon a hand signal which the person working in the excavation could give the excavator operator to stop the excavator if he considered it necessary.
The injured person received a broken distal shaft to the right femur, a broken mid shaft to the right radius, muscle damage to his right thigh and hand, plus cuts to other parts of the body.
The defendant pleaded guilty. Upon being convicted the defendant appealed the fine imposed. The original fine was  $25,000 and  $1500. The grounds for the appeal against the fine were, first, that the learned Magistrate failed to give any, or any proper, reasons for the decision to impose a fine of $25,000 and, second, that the fine was manifestly excessive.
His Honour concluded that the reasons given by the learned Magistrate were inadequate. His honour also found that the fine imposed was excessive and reduced the fine.
|Conviction Date||26 Sep 1997|
|Court||Perth Court of Petty Sessions|
|Fine||$12,500  and $1500 |
|Charge Number||55023/97 , 55024/97  and Lib No: 980177|