HWLE Lawyers’ National Safety Update – March 2026
Market Insights
Welcome to HWLE Lawyers’ National Safety Update for March 2026.
We have collated a number of safety articles from around Australia. “Safety Culture” is the new phrase being used by the safety regulators and is being repeated in the Courts. In the below case of Illawara Turf Club, the Court accepted the submission that the Club did not have a culture of safety. As you read each of our articles, you may well ask the question, what is the “Corporate Safety Culture” of the business and industry in the articles, and how would you describe the “Corporate Safety Culture” of your workplace?
NEW SOUTH WALES
Club’s WHS & Food Safety double jeopardy argument fails after serving margaritas rimmed with caustic soda
A sports and recreation club has failed in its bid to stop a SafeWork NSW prosecution after two patrons were burned by margaritas mistakenly rimmed with caustic soda. The incident stemmed from an unlabelled container that was incorrectly refilled with the corrosive chemical, leading to earlier Food Authority proceedings in which the Club was fined over $48,000. Arguing double jeopardy, the Club claimed the WHS prosecution covered the same conduct, but the Industrial Court found the Food Act and WHS Act offences were fundamentally different and dismissed the application. The case underscores the importance of proper labelling, safe chemical handling, and robust training systems.
Race club convicted and fined for 5.2 metre fall
The Illawarra Turf Club has been convicted and fined $200,000 after a hospitality worker fell more than five metres through a skylight while assisting with roof work at Kembla Grange Racecourse. The District Court found the Club had failed to implement even basic height‑safety measures and criticised its poor safety culture. Although the Club took significant remedial steps after the incident, the Court held that directing untrained staff to work at heights demonstrated a serious breach of WHS duties. The case reinforces that organisations must manage height‑related risks whenever and wherever they arise, regardless of industry or frequency of such tasks.
SOUTH AUSTRALIA
Acquittal in lengthy WHS prosecution
After four years and two appeals, an Adelaide based towing company has successfully argued for its conviction and penalty relating to the 2018 death of an employee in the crush zone between a two truck’s retracting tilt tray and the vehicle’s headboard to be set aside. The full bench of the South Australian Employment Tribunal ruled that SafeWork SA did not present sufficient evidence that an alternative safety control would have been effective, or that the company would have been advised to implement this control if it sought expert assistance. Ultimately, the full bench were satisfied that the manufacturer of the truck, who was also charged and pleaded guilty, was qualified to design and manufacture the tilt tray and it did not recommend the safety control proposed by SafeWork SA, and SafeWork SA was unable to show that other expert opinion would have recommended this safety control.
VICTORIA
AFL concussion ruling provides insight into OHS Regulations
A recent Supreme Court of Victoria decision in Rooke v Australian Foodball League (No 2) has clarified the limits of employers’ duties under Victoria’s OHS Regulations. Former Geelong player Max Rooke had argued that the AFL and his club were responsible under the Regulations not only for preventing concussion‑related injuries but also for managing their long‑term consequences. Justice Keogh dismissed the claim, finding that the Regulations require employers to control risks associated with hazardous manual handling tasks but do not extend to ongoing care after an injury occurs. While the ruling narrows liability for post‑injury management in the context of hazardous manual handling tasks, employers must still rigorously identify and control the risks associated with the performance of those tasks.
WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Hard hats, high vis, site inductions and – hold up – who let you in? Site safety protocols and union rights of entry
Ongoing litigation between BMD Constructions and the CFMEU, over right‑of‑entry disputes on the Centenary Bridge Upgrade project, has highlighted the uneasy interaction between WHS laws and right of entry laws. In this ongoing litigation, the Federal Court has previously granted interim orders requiring CFMEU officials to complete site‑specific WHS inductions before entering site and restraining them from engaging in conduct that could compromise safety on site. To further complicate matters, new powers for health and safety representatives and WHS entry permit holders, that were due to commence in Queensland, have recently been repealed by Queensland parliament before they ever took effect, highlighting that the complex laws surrounding rights of entry remain in flux.
QUEENSLAND
Overhead crane loads contacts worker in exclusion zone
A steel supply and processing company has been fined $80,000 (without conviction) after two young workers were seriously injured in a crane incident at its Mackay warehouse. The company pleaded guilty to breaching its primary duty under Queensland’s Work Health and Safety Act, failing to enforce exclusion zones and provide sufficient training and supervision. The Court found the breach stemmed from inadequate oversight and reinforcement of safe procedures but acknowledged the company’s early guilty plea, remorse and previously clean safety record in determining the penalty.
Subscribe for publications + events
HWLE regularly publishes articles and newsletters to keep our clients up to date on the latest legal developments and what this means for your business. To receive these updates via email, please complete the subscription form and indicate which areas of law you would like to receive information on.
* indicates required fields