SafeWork NSW v Newcastle Roofing Professionals Pty Ltd [2025] NSWDC 155 | Case summary | Zoe

NSWNSWDC

SafeWork NSW v Newcastle Roofing Professionals Pty Ltd

[2025] NSWDC 155

District Court of NSW|2025-05-02|Before: Russell SC DCJ

View on NSW CaselawOr email me a plain-English summary of this case

General information, not legal advice.

At a glance

Source facts

Court

District Court of NSW

Decision date

2025-05-02

Before

Russell SC DCJ

Catchwords

CRIMINAL LAW – prosecution – work health and safety –
duty of persons undertaking business – risk of death
or serious
injury SENTENCE – objective seriousness – mitigating

Source

Original judgment source is linked above.

Email me a plain-English summary of this case

Zoe will write a short plain-English summary of this judgment and email it to you for free: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.

General information, not legal advice.

Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.

Catchwords

CRIMINAL LAW – prosecution – work health and safety –duty of persons undertaking business – risk of deathor seriousinjury SENTENCE – objective seriousness – mitigatingfactors – aggravating factors – plea of guilty – generaldeterrence – specific deterrence – capacity to pay appropriatepenalty COSTS – prosecution costs OTHER –fall from roof – failure to install fall prevention devices around theperimeter of the roof – failure toproperly assess anchor pointrequirements and develop and document an anchor point plan – failure todevelop, implement andenforce a site-specific Safe Work Method Statement

Judgment

Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.

Medium Neutral Citation: SafeWork NSW v Newcastle Roofing Professionals Pty Ltd [2025] NSWDC 155

Hearing dates: 29 April 2025

Newcastle Roofing was engaged to undertake the roof replacement at a split-level residential premises at Valentine (the site). The premises was two stories at the front. The premises extended in an L-shape towards the rear of the block. The roof consisted of the front (western section), and two rear (eastern) sections in a sawtooth-style configuration. The main eastern roof was estimated to be approximately 1m lower at the ridge line than the western roof. The peak of the western roof was measured to be approximately 7m to the ground below.
The works involved removing existing tiles from sections of the roof and supplying and installing Colourbond roofing and associated fixings. The roof was a gabled-style roof.
At the rear (eastern) side of the house was a stairway extending from the ground to the first floor. At the top of the steps was a covered balcony. At the base of the steps was a tiled landing. The roof was fitted with solar panels along the western (front) aspect. The pitch of the roof was approximately 10 to 12 degrees.
On 8 May 2021, Roof Assessor, Mr Whatling attended the site to undertake an initial assessment of the works.
On 5 August 2021, Mr Whatling returned to the site to undertake a more detailed assessment of the work that was required to be undertaken, including assessing the health and safety risks involved in undertaking the roof replacement works. Mr Whatling took photographs of the roof and drafted a "mud map" for the roof replacement works. The photographs and the mud map were used by Mr Karg to enable a quotation to be provided to the owner of the premises. Mr Whatling's mud map was recorded in Newcastle Roofing’s CMS 'Job Progress' system. At the time of his assessment, Mr Whatling did not conduct a risk assessment to determine what controls ought to be implemented to manage the risk of a fall from the perimeter edge of the roof.
On 6 August 2021, Newcastle Roofing provided a quotation for the roof replacement works to the customer. The works included supply and installation of roof railing as per health and safety requirements. Newcastle Roofing used its prior experience to estimate the cost of the roof railing required for the job. The cost of the proposed works was $35,850.00.
On 17 August 2021, the customer accepted the quotation.
On 2 September 2021, a Registered Training Organisation, Combined Safety Services, were engaged by Newcastle Roofing and provided training and assessment in the course 'Work Safely at Heights' to Mr Rundle and Mr Ramage.
On 12 October 2021, Mr Woodhouse, Assessor, attended the site to measure up the roof, and to determine the quantities of various materials and products required to undertake the re-roofing.
On 12 October 2021, Mr Woodhouse completed notations as to the requirements for the material for the new roof. Mr Woodhouse's notebook record includes a notation “complete scaffold”. Mr Woodhouse recommended the installation of complete scaffold for the site because in his view the roof rail system would not be able to be installed due to the height.
On 13 October 2021, Mr Woodhouse informed Newcastle Roofing about the height of the roof and recommended that scaffolding would be required. In response to Mr Woodhouse's recommendation Ms Humphries sent an email to Xtreme Scaffold Pty Ltd (Xtreme) requesting a quotation for scaffolding to be erected around the perimeter of the roof at the site. Xtreme were provided with photographs of the roof and the equipment requirements.
On 13 October 2021, Xtreme provided a quotation for all four sides of the house in the amount of $4,585.00 plus GST.
On 13 October 2021, Newcastle Roofing prepared a Safe Work Method Statement (SWMS) for 'General Roof Work' for the work to be undertaken at the site. The SWMS recorded that Mr Twist, Mr Fowkes, Mr Karg and Mr Miller were consulted and involved in the preparation of the General Roof Work SWMS.
On 14 October 2021, Mr Twist, Mr Karg and Mr Fowkes participated in an online meeting with SafeWork NSW (SafeWork) about working safely on roofs.
During the meeting, SafeWork provided the Newcastle Roofing staff with information on:
the hierarchy of controls for minimising the risk of a fall;
edge protection;
systems of work for fall arrest/temporary restraint;
anchorage points, including the requirement for safe access to be provided to anchor points; and
the requirement to complete a documented plan which shows the harness-based system layout, access points including method (i.e., scaffold stairs, ladder, fall hazards such as edges, skylights, polycarbonate roof sheets) anchor point locations and the number of anchor points required, the radius of travel from the anchor in relation to the fall hazards.
On 15 October 2021, Newcastle Roofing sent an email to the customer advising that, due to SafeWork requirements, in order to complete the works, scaffolding was required. Newcastle Roofing provided the customer with the costs of the scaffolding and inquired whether the customer wished to proceed with the job or cancel.
On 18 October 2021, the customer advised by return email that he did not wish to pay additional costs for the works.
On 18 October 2021, Newcastle Roofing spoke to Site Safety Specialists Pty Limited trading as Site Safety to book a roof rail system for the works. Site Safety is a business which provides and installs roof safety rails in Newcastle and surrounding regions. On 18 October 2021 Newcastle Roofing provided Site Safety with the photographs taken by Mr Whatling and the mud map. On 18 October 2021, Site Safety confirmed due to the nature of the gables on the roof of the house they could not provide roof rails around the perimeter of the entire roof. Site Safety advised they would install roof rails at the front of the premises and as far up the sides of the roof as the gables would allow.
As a result of Site Safety's inability to install roof rails around the perimeter of the entire roof, Newcastle Roofing determined that the works could proceed in the absence of scaffolding and instead using a combination of a roof rails where they could be installed and a harnessbased system, involving the installation of anchor points on the roof onto which lanyards would be attached for workers to then attach their harnesses.
On 18 October 2021, Mr Karg contacted the customer and arranged for the removal of solar panels from the roof and for the installation of a roof rail system.
On 20 October 2021, Site Safety installed a roof rail system along the front elevation of the property and the solar panels were removed.
On or around 21 October 2021, the roofing material was delivered to the site and the workers commenced stripping the tile roof.
From 25 October to early November 2021, the work was delayed due to the weather.
From early November 2021, the workers continued with the roof installation works.
On Friday 5 November 2021, the Newcastle Roofing workers completed installing new sheets on the eastern facing pitch of the roof. The work was subsequently abandoned due to rain. A tarpaulin was fixed to the roof where the new sheets were yet to be installed.
On 5 November 2021, the customer contacted Newcastle Roofing and advised that the tarpaulin they had put on the roof was flapping around.
On or about 5 November 2021, the work crew who were going to continue the works at the site the following week, were informed via the Job Progress app of the status of the installation, the further work required to be undertaken, and the requirement to use harnesses in sections of the roof where the roof rails were not able to be installed.
On Sunday 7 November 2021, there was a major leak into the house as a result of the inadequately secured tarpaulin. Mr Karg instructed Mr Anderson to attend the site on Monday to help the workers rectify the tarpaulin.

On 8 November 2021, Mr Rundle, Mr Anderson, Mr Ramage, Mr Roberts, Mr Allmon and Mr Holt were all on site.
Mr Rundle informed the workers to stay off the roof until he had spoken to the owners. Mr Rundle then went inside the house to speak to the owner about the water leaks that had come inside the house, allegedly because the tarpaulin that had been put over sections of the house was not tied down correctly.
While Mr Rundle was inside the house, Mr Anderson spoke to the rest of the workers, including Mr Roberts and Mr Ramage and told the workers not to go near the roof because he believed it would be wet and he wanted to see what the weather was doing before the tarpaulins were removed.
Mr Anderson then left the house to use a nearby public toilet.
After speaking with the customer inside the house, Mr Rundle came back outside the house, and told the workers, including Mr Ramage and Mr Roberts, to get their tools and equipment ready, including harnesses, as the workers would need to start removing the tarpaulin that was covering the section of the roof were the leaking had occurred. Mr Rundle was then called by the owners back into the house to inspect more damage.
On 8 November 2021, an access ladder was positioned on the southern side of the house. The access was onto a single storey sloped section of the roof.
Mr Ramage and Mr Roberts accessed the roof by ascending the ladder. Mr Ramage and Mr Roberts were wearing harnesses and lanyards and attached their lanyards to the anchor points as they commenced removing the tarpaulin.
After speaking with the customer inside the house, Mr Rundle returned outside and saw the workers had accessed the roof and commenced removing the tarpaulin. Mr Rundle accessed the roof via the ladder and traversed the tile roof towards an anchor point to connect his lanyard. Mr Rundle slipped and slid down the metal roof when approaching the anchor point. The anchor point system was not adequate to provide protection against the risk of Mr Rundle falling from the roof, including when accessing it.
At about 7:30am Mr Rundle slipped to the edge of the roof and fell approximately 4.2 metres from the eastern elevation of the roof to the tiled landing below, striking the handrail of a set of stairs as he fell.
Mr Anderson had returned to the site and observed Mr Ramage wearing a harness and working on the front section of the roof removing the tarpaulins. Mr Anderson went to his truck to get his tools shortly prior to the incident.
An ambulance attended and Mr Rundle was conveyed to John Hunter Hospital.

Prior to the incident SafeWork had published the Code of Practice – Managing the Risk of Falls (Falls Code) in August 2019. The Falls Code is admissible under section 274 of the WHS Act, and the Court may have regard to the Falls Code as evidence of what is known about a hazard or risk, risk assessment and risk controls. The Falls Code was available to Newcastle Roofing prior to the incident and relevantly provided:
Falls are a major cause of death and serious injury in Australian workplaces.
When work cannot be performed on the ground or from a solid construction, you, as a PCBU must minimise the risk of a fall by providing a fall prevention device, if it is reasonably practicable to do so.
A 'fall prevention device' is material or equipment—or a combination of both—designed to prevent a fall from temporary work at heights, that once in place after initial installation does not require any ongoing adjustment, alteration, or operation by any person to ensure its integrity. Fall prevention devices include edge protection.
Guardrails may be used to provide effective fall prevention at the edge of roofs.
A 'work positioning system' includes any plant or structure, other than a temporary work platform, that enables a person to be positioned and safely supported at a location in such a way that a fall is prevented.
The use of work positioning systems must only be considered if it is not reasonably practicable to carry out work on the ground or on a solid construction, or by providing a fall prevention device.
A restraint technique controls a person's movement by physically preventing the person from reaching a position at which there is a risk of a fall. It consists of a harness that is connected by a lanyard to an anchorage or horizontal lifeline. It must be set up to prevent the wearer from reaching an unprotected edge.
Restraint techniques must only be used if it is not reasonably practicable to prevent falls by carrying out work on the ground or on a solid construction, or by minimising the risk using a fall prevention device, such as providing a physical barrier, for example a guardrail.
Fall arrest systems, such individual fall arrest systems, are intended to safely stop a worker falling an uncontrolled distance and reduce the impact of the fall. These systems must only be used if it is not reasonably practicable to use a fall prevention device or work positioning system or if these higher-level controls might not be fully effective in preventing a fall on their own.
When using fall arrest systems, the following key safety measures should be observed:

Prior to the incident Newcastle Roofing had identified the need for temporary edge protection to be installed to guard against the risk of a fall from the perimeter edge of the house. The house was assessed by Mr Woodhouse as requiring a "complete scaffold”. Newcastle Roofing obtained a quote for the scaffolding for the perimeter of the house, however the installation did not proceed as the customer was not prepared to pay the increased cost of the quotation. Newcastle Roofing considered the job could proceed with harnesses and roof rails (where able to be fitted).
Prior to the incident Newcastle Roofing generally only used temporary edge protection when roofs were higher than average. It was usual practice for workers to use harnesses when working on roofs.
Newcastle Roofing did not install fall prevention devices around the perimeter of the roof, such as a combination of scaffolding and a roof safety rail system. In the event the customer did not wish to pay for the required edge protection, Newcastle Roofing could have not proceeded with the job.
Newcastle Roofing did not develop and implement an adequate fall arrest system to be used by the workers. Prior to the incident there was no documented anchor point plan which showed the system layout of the harness-based system including anchor point locations, the number of anchor points required and the radius of travel from the anchor in relation to the fall hazards.
Prior to the incident Newcastle Roofing had a SWMS titled "General Roof Wor**k SWMS”. The SWMS was incomplete and covered both tiled and metal sheet roofing. The SWMS identified the potential hazard of a fall from an unprotected edge from both metal and tile roofs. The SWMS required Newcastle Roofing to select the high-risk construction work hazards onsite and the most effective and relevant risk controls for the job, such as edge protection, harnesses, and lanyards. However, prior to the incident no items on the SWMS had been selected.
Prior to the incident Newcastle Roofing made the SWMS available to workers by electronic means via a Job Progress app. Workers who had access to the SWMS were prompted to electronically sign the SWMS prior to commencing work each day.
Newcastle Roofing’s records show the SWMS was accessed by Mr Rundle and Mr Ramage via the Job Progress app. However, Mr Anderson, Mr Roberts, Mr Allmon and Mr Holt were not provided with the SWMS.

In the early years of Newcastle Roofing operation, Mr Dale Miller (Operations Manager) and Mr Twist created a SWMS for roofing works.
Mr Miller and Mr Twist obtained the information for the creation of that SWMS from a number of sources, including materials on SafeWork’s website in respect of working at heights, building and construction work generally and other resources available from the internet.
When the SWMS was introduced, Newcastle Roofing inducted its workers through the SWMS. The SWMS was used for both tiled and metal roofing jobs.
Newcastle Roofing primarily relied upon the preparation of SWMSs and toolbox talks to identify the hazards relevant to the particular job, and the control measures to be implemented.
Newcastle Roofing’s general practice was to prepare a SWMS for the type of work to be performed (or utilise an existing SWMS that applied to that type of work) and discuss that document with the workers at the start of the project. Toolbox talks would be held with the workers at the start of each new work activity. The relevant supervisor would discuss with the workers what the new work activity involved, how it was proposed to be undertaken, any hazards or risks associated with the activity and the control measures.
Mr Twist found that generally this method was effective in conveying to Newcastle Roofing workers how to undertake the tasks safely.
Newcastle Roofing’s general practice was that the supervisor attended the work site to conduct a site assessment prior to each job. They looked at hazards, issues including access issues, the pitch of the roof and other things pertinent to the safety matters.
Newcastle Roofing’s general practice was that prior to performing the assessment, a harness safety plan was prepared to allow access to the roof.
Newcastle Roofing’s general practice was that the relevant supervisor allocated to a work crew conducted daily toolbox talks and provided daily SWMSs. The SWMSs were prepared at the office and provided to the supervisors with at least as many as would be needed for each employee at the site. They were handed out daily.
At some stage in 2021, Newcastle Roofing identified that its SWMS was outdated and inadequate to controls the risks.
Mr Miller and Mr Twist consulted with SafeWork to obtain relevant information and resources to improve Newcastle Roofing’s safety systems. Messrs Miller and Twist also sought assistance and advice from "Construction WHS Consultants".
In or about October 2021, Newcastle Roofing prepared a new SWMS titled 'General Roof Works SWMS'. This SWMS was designed to be a comprehensive SWMS that would cover both tiled roof works and metal roof works.
The General Roof Works SWMS was made available to workers via an app on their electronic devices, called 'Eversign'. All tradespeople were required to sign and return the SWMS before commencing any roofing work.
The General Roof Works SWMS was the SWMS in place as at the date of the Incident involving Mr Rundle.

After the Incident, Newcastle Roofing reviewed its systems relating to its workers undertaking high risk works at height. As a result, Newcastle Roofing developed, implemented and enforced a series of measures addressing hazards and risks associated with its workers working from height. These are set out below.
All roofing workers were taken through the Roofing Work SWMS prior to commencing works on any sites.
Workers were given an opportunity to raise any concerns or issues in relation to the site or particular work activities to be undertaken during the project.
If new hazards and controls were identified for the project, the SWMS would be amended to include any new hazard and the controls required to address the new hazard. Workers then signed off on their knowledge and understanding of the content of the SWMS.
The safe work practices for working at heights that were established were followed in all further jobs. This was done by reviewing the SWMS before every new job, after the job site was viewed and assessed. The SWMS was amended and reviewed where necessary depending on the requirements and conditions of the job. The SWMS was discussed with workers during toolbox talks before each job commenced and after any updates.
In the period after the incident, until the change in the nature of Newcastle Roofing operations (which is discussed further below), Newcastle Roofing prioritised taking a simple and practical approach to delivering support, training and education for its workers on safety issues on every site.
In the period after the incident, until the change in the nature of Newcastle Roofing’s operations, Newcastle Roofing included material demonstrating the correct and safe method of work for undertaking particular tasks in its SWMS. The site supervisor was to meet with the workers onsite at the start of the job and go through the content of the SWMS, and discuss with the workers any risks relating to the particular duties being undertaken. Workers were able to ask questions or raise concerns about the way the work is to be completed and any hazards or risk that they have identified.
Mr Twist has found that this process achieved greater outcomes to worker engagement and safety outcomes at sites.

Since April 2022, Newcastle Roofing has changed its method of operation. Newcastle Roofing now operates as a 'Sales and Marketing' company only.
Newcastle Roofing markets roofing services, such as leak detection, roof repairs, roof restoration (roof painting), Colorbond roofing, Colorbond guttering, gutter guard and roof ventilation for qualified roofing contractors.
As part of its new business model, Newcastle Roofing is structured as follows:
Brendan Twist, General Manager;
Michelle Twist, Accounts payable and Administration;
Jarrod Baars, Roof Plumbing Supervisor. Mr Baars has Cert Ill Roof Plumbing, White card, Qualified Supervisor Certificate and has 19 years of experience in the industry;
Jake Errington, Roof Tiling Supervisor. Mr Errington has Certificate Ill Roof Tiling and 13 years work experience in the industry;
Kevin Cournane, building supervisor; and
Chris Rundle.
There are also a series of workers who perform administration, sales and marketing work for Newcastle Roofing.
For a period there were also casual door-to-door marketers who worked on behalf of Newcastle Roofing.
Newcastle Roofing now takes inquiries from potential customers, and then schedules its qualified roof plumbing supervisor or roof tiling supervisor to assess the required work.
Newcastle Roofing then prepares separate quotations of the required work in relation to:
Materials costs.
Labour only costs.
When a customer accepts that quotation, Newcastle Roofing contacts one of its network of roofing contractors to ascertain whether they wish to perform the roofing works.
Newcastle Roofing no longer employs roofing workers either as direct employees or deemed employees, nor does it engage workers as roofing contractors.
Another entity, Newcastle Roofing Supplies Pty Ltd (Newcastle Supplies), which is owned by Mr Twist, provides the relevant materials and supplies necessary for the work to be undertaken by the client.
Newcastle Roofing charges Newcastle Supplies weekly for marketing fees to pay its staff.
Newcastle Supplies employs three workers who deliver the relevant materials and supplies to the roofing contractors and customers, perform yard hand work, and serve customers in the shop.
Newcastle Supplies renders an invoice to the customer for the materials and supplies, and the costs of any roof rails provided by the roof railing contractor.
Newcastle Roofing has taken steps to ensure that all roofing contractor companies that it deals with who provide roofing services have appropriate qualifications and accreditations.
The accredited roofing contractor that performs the roofing work then sends an invoice to the customer for that work.
Neither Newcastle Roofing nor Newcastle Supplies performs any roofing labour work.
In order to ensure that all roofing contracting companies who take on jobs referred to them by Newcastle Roofing will perform the work safely and to ensure quality control, where necessary, Newcastle Roofing arrange for a third-party specialist safety training, products and services provider, Combined Safety Services, to provide certification and training to those roofing contractors, particularly for working at heights.
Combined Safety Services is a Registered Training Organisation that offers nationally recognized safety training, professional consultancy and audit services, roof safety system installation and certification, equipment sales, hire, and inspection services.
As Newcastle Roofing do not carry out roofing services, and are only a sales and marketing company providing interested customers with selected accredited contractors, Newcastle Roofing engages Newcastle Supplies to organise and install roof safety rail systems for those contractors that do not have their own.
Where required, Newcastle Supplies also engages specialist height safety companies to install height safety equipment at job sites, in particular the installation roof safety rails for those roofing contractors who accept referrals of roofing jobs that do not have their own roof safety rails.
The installation of roof railings was previously done by Newcastle Roofing outsourcing that job to a company - Site Safety Pty Ltd.
In November 2023, Newcastle Supplies purchased various height safety equipment, including scaffolding, Guard Tile systems, and Guard Rail Barrier systems that could be supplied to roofing contractors.
In about June 2024, Newcastle Roofing purchased a roof safety rail truck under finance valued at $66,000.00. A copy of the invoice from Roofing Central dated 4 June 2024 for the truck and roof safety rail is exhibited to Mr Twist’s affidavit.
More recently, Newcastle Roofing has been referring its roofing contractors to a different roof railing company namely 'Insight Safety Solutions Pty Limited'.
Since approximately September 2024, there has been a decline in the level of customer interest in roofing services which has resulted in a decline in the number of customers that Newcastle Roofing have been able to successfully source for Newcastle Supplies and the third-party roofing contractors.
As a result of that decline, in April 2025, the employment of three members of the administration, sales and marketing team was terminated. It is anticipated that the employment of another two to three members of the administration, sales and marketing team will finish in the near future.

The defendant was convicted at the sentence hearing on 29 April 2025.
Part 3 Division 2 of the CSP Act deals with Victim Impact Statements. The provisions apply to an offence being dealt with summarily by the District Court where the offence results in the death of, or actual physical bodily harm to, any person – s 27(2)(a).
By s 28(1) a primary victim may prepare a statement that contains particulars of the following suffered as a direct result of the offence:
Any personal harm.
Any emotional suffering or distress.
Any harm to relationships with other persons.
Any economic loss or harm that arises from any matter referred to in (1) – (3) above.
A Victim Impact Statement may be tendered to the court only by the prosecutor – s 30A(2). A court must accept a Victim Impact Statement tendered by a prosecutor if the statement complies with the requirements of the Division – s 30B. A victim to whom a Victim Impact Statement relates may read out the whole or part of their Victim Impact Statement – s 30D(1).
A court to which a Victim Impact Statement has been tendered must consider the statement at any time after it convicts but before it sentences, and may make any comment on the statement that the court considers appropriate – s 30E(1).
The prosecutor tendered the short Victim Impact Statement of Mr Rundle, dated 16 April 2025 (PX 3). Mr Rundle is a 41 year-old father of six children aged between 22 years and 3 years. Four of those children have disabilities. Mr Rundle was in a new relationship at the time of the incident but this has since ended.
Mr Rundle described the operations, pain, anxiety and worry caused by his severe injuries. He suffers from “crippling nerve pain shooting from my foot all the way to my hip” and experiences a “burning fire sensation in my foot at night despite multiple nerve blocks and surgical treatment to cut off the sensation”. Mr Rundle can mobilise in a wheelchair but finds this painful. He has been left with few friends and little support, apart from that provided by his two adult daughters.

SafeWork NSW v Newcastle Roofing Professionals Pty Ltd

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Catchwords

Source

Email me a plain-English summary of this case

Catchwords

Judgment

Judgment

The Risk

Reasonably Practicable Measures

Background

The roof replacement work

8 November 2021

Injuries

Relevant legislation and guidance material

Work Health and Safety Regulation 2017 (NSW)

SafeWork NSW Code of Practice – Managing the Risk of Falls

SafeWork NSW Code of Practice – Construction Work

SafeWork NSW Code of Practice – Managing the Risk of Falls in Housing Construction

SafeWork NSW Roof edge protection fact sheet

Other Guidance Material

Systems of work prior the incident

Steps following the incident

Evidence for the Defendant

Overview of the business

Systems of work in place prior to the Incident

Immediate steps taken after the Incident

Subsequent improvements

Change in the nature of Newcastle Roofing Professionals Pty Ltd business

Support for the injured worker

Remorse and contrition

Capacity to pay a fine

Consideration

Objective Seriousness of the Offence

Deterrence

Aggravating Factors

Mitigating Factors

Capacity to Pay a Fine

Victim Impact Statement

Costs

Penalty

Parties

Legislation Cited (3)

Cases Cited (6)