Sentencing — failing to ensure health and safety of workers — exposing individual to risk of death or serious injury — fall from height — man cage — Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, ss 36(1)(a), 48, 151(2)(d) & 152(1) — Stumpmaster v WorkSafe New Zealand [2018] NZHC 2020, [2018] 3 NZLR 881 — Department of Labour v Hanham & Philp Contractors Ltd (2009) 9 NZELC 93,095 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Marcel Syron Priority One Construction 2012 Ltd [2016] NZDC 27011 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Rickie Shore Building Ltd [2016] NZDC 18215 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Totally Rigging Ltd [2016] NZDC 21266 — Hessell v R [2010] NZSC 135 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Kaye’s Bakery Ltd [2018] NZDC 5427. The defendant appeared for sentence after pleading guilty to charges of failing to ensure the health and safety of its workers and exposing an individual to the risk of death or serious injury. It was a construction company that had engaged two contract workers to build a shed. The workers were using a tractor with an attached man cage to complete the task. The man cage had not been attached properly and came loose, causing one of the workers (the victim) to fall 3.5 metres to the ground, where he suffered serious injuries to his knees. A subsequent investigation by WorkSafe revealed the defendant's failings, which included to develop and implement a safe system of work for building the shed, and to properly train, instruct and supervise the workers. The defendant had already paid the victim $15,000, and the Court decided that this amount was sufficient and ordered no further reparations. The Court found that the defendant's culpability fell into the medium range, given the risk of serious harm, the obviousness of the hazard, and the lack of supervision. The start point for fine was $400,000, and the defendant earned reductions for its good record, remorse, cooperation with the investigation and early guilty plea. Given the defendant's financial state, the Court ordered that no fine be paid, but did make an order that the defendant provide training to its staff on how to work at height. The Court also ordered the defendant to pay prosecution costs of $2202.03. Judgment Date: 27 May 2020