district court logo

WorkSafe New Zealand v Richard Stodart Building Ltd [2019] NZDC 4119

Published 22 August 2019

Sentencing — WorkSafe — amputation — Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, ss 36, 48, 151, 152 & 158 — Stumpmaster v WorkSafe New Zealand [2018] NZHC 2190 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Stoneyhurst Timber Ltd [2016] NZDC 17200 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Niagara Sawmilling Company Ltd [2018] NZDC 3667 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Marshall Industries Ltd [2018] NZDC 4498 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Agricentre South Ltd [2019] NZDC 3498. The defendant company faced sentencing having pleaded guilty to contravening ss 36 and 48 of the Health and Safety at Work Act. The defendant was a building company specialising in residential construction and renovations. The victim was employed by the defendant and was tasked with cutting timber pegs with a radial arm saw. It was the victim's first day of full-time employment and first time using the saw. His boss gave him an overview of the saw, explained the hazards, gave him the correct personal protective equipment and demonstrated the procedure. He also oversaw the victim cutting approximately 30 pegs before being satisfied he was proficient with the saw and left the workshop. Sometime later, the victim's hand made contact with the unguarded saw and amputated his index and middle fingers, along with a significant wound to his thumb. The Judge, applying the Stumpmaster decision, began with the reparation order. Given the defendant had already paid the victim $30,000 for emotional harm and topped up the victim's ACC payments, the prosecution did not seek further payment. In assessing the fine, the Judge considered prior case law and adopted a starting point of $400,000. A discount of 20 per cent was granted for the reparation, co-operation, remorse and previous good safety record. A further 25 per cent was reduced for the early guilty plea, bringing the fine to $240,000. The Judge then considered the financial position of the defendant and reduced the end fine to $60,000. The defendant was also ordered to pay $500 towards the prosecution costs. Judgment Date: 5 March 2019.