skip navigation

Prosecution Details

Defendant Dennis William Badcock
Trading Name Erections
Section [1] 19(1)(a) and 19(6)
Regulation [2] 6.3(1)
Offence Date Tuesday, 4 July 2000
Description of Breach(es)

[1] 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.


[2] Performed prescribed work, namely rigging, when he did not hold a certificate of competency that he was required by the National Occupational Health and Safety Certification Standard for Users and Operators of Industrial Equipment [NOHSC: 1006 (1995)] to hold to perform that work.

Background Details

The defendant was in the business of erecting sheds and was engaged to erect an extension to an existing shed in Williams. The extension was 5 metres long by 35 metres wide. The height of the roof of the extension was 6 metres.

On 4 July 2000 two employees were assisting the defendant. They were in the process of connecting a "C" channel fascia to the skillion roof where the existing roof connects to the extension roof. The defendant's employees were both standing on ladders; one at the inside end of the new gable and the other at the outside end. The "C" channel was raised by rope and one of the employees connected his end with bolts. One of the employees were having trouble connecting his end, so the defendant used a Hiab crane to raise the skillion roof truss so that the "C" channel fascia could fit into place. The crane took the weight of the truss and the employee removed the bolts. He was having difficulty removing the last bolts when the truss jumped up. The sudden movement caused him to be thrown off balance. He had one foot on the ladder and the other foot on the truss. The employee's leg slipped off the ladder rung and he fell head first to the ground. He sustained fractures to his spine and left wrist, as well as a broken right wrist.

It would have been practicable for the defendant to have provided his workers with fall arrest equipment and insisted they use it. The defendant did not hold a certificate of competency in relation to rigging as required by the National Occupational Health and Safety Certification Standard for Users and Operators of Industrial Equipment [NOHSC: 1006 (1995)]. The use of mechanical load shifting equipment to erect steel is rigging. In this instance the defendant was in charge of the erection of the truss and mechanical load shifting equipment was used. Therefore, he was performing rigging work.

These charges were heard with one other charge against the defendant and a global fine of $6000 was imposed by the Magistrate. In sentencing the Magistrate took into account the defendant's financial position and the fact that he no longer operates a shed erecting business. His Worship indicated that a deterrent sentence was called for to ensure others did not cut corners in the manner the defendant did. He also noted that two people were injured and could have lost their lives.

The defendant pleaded not guilty. In relation to charge [1] the penalty was imposed under section 19(6).

Outcome Summary


Conviction Date 06 Aug 2001
Court Midland Court of Petty Sessions
Fine $6000 (global)
Costs $886.20
Charge Number 4431/01 [1] and 4432/01 [2]