Sentencing — failing to ensure health and safety of workers — paper mill — machine guarding — Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, ss 36, 48 & 151 — Sentencing Act 2002 s 7 — Stumpmaster v WorkSafe New Zealand [2018] NZHC 2020 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Alliance Group Ltd [2015] NZDC 21538 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Alto Packaging Ltd [2022] NZDC 6148 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Donovan Group NZ Ltd [2022] NZDC 23982 — Ocean Fisheries Ltd v Maritime New Zealand [2021] 3 NZLR 443 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Essential Homes Limited [2020] NZDC 5873 — WorkSafe New Zealand Ltd v Tree & Forest Ltd [2019] NZDC 25406 — WorkSafe v Pallet Company [2019] NZDC 18776 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Skyline Buildings Ltd [2020] NZDC 10681 — WorkSafe New Zealand & Kimberley Tool & Design NZ Ltd v John Brian Parker [2019] NZDC 16489 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Insulpro Manufacturing Ltd [2019] NZDC 4843 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Nutrimetics International (New Zealand) Ltd [2018] NZDC 4972 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Fletcher Steel Ltd — WorkSafe New Zealand v NZCC Ltd [2019] NZDC 16662 — WorkSafe New Zealand v Insulpro Manufacturing Ltd [2019] NZDC 4843. The defendant company appeared for sentencing after pleading guilty to a charge of exposing an employee to risk of death, serious injury or serious illness. The defendant owned and operated a paper mill where the victim had been working. The victim had been trying to clean one of the paper-making machines when his glove was caught in the roller, pulling his hand into the machine. The victim suffered severe injuries to his hand, requiring three surgeries and amputations. The Court recognised that the victim had not been using the usual process for cleaning the machine, but found that the defendant should not have relied just on the safe operating procedure, and that guards should have been installed preventing access to the moving parts of the machine. The starting point for the fine was set at $350,000. A discount of 50 per cent was allowed for the defendant's guilty plea, remorse, remedial steps taken and co-operation, bringing the fine down to $175,000. Additional orders were made for the defendant to pay $30,000 to the victim as emotional harm reparation, and $7,131.70 for prosecution costs. Judgment Date: 7 August 2023.