NEW SOUTH WALES COURT ISSUES JUDGEMENT FOR SAFEWORK NSW V/S RICHARD CROOKES CONSTRUCTIONS CASE

Australia, Sept. 9 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on Aug. 8:

1. By Notice of Motion, SafeWork NSW seeks the following orders:

1) That the charges brought by SafeWork NSW against Richard Crookes Constructions Pty Ltd (RCC) in the matter of 2024/177647 and against Transform Formwork Contractors Pty Ltd (Transform) in the matter of 2024/177652 be heard and determined together.

2) Both matters be listed for a mention date convenient to the court to set a timetable in preparation for a joint trial.

Background

2. By Summonses filed in the District Court on 14 May 2024, SafeWork NSW alleges that the defendants breached s 19(1) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW) (WHS Act) and s 32 of the WHS Act. The same charge is brought by SafeWork NSW against Transform and RCC.

3. On 21 May 2025, I made orders with regard to the filing of material in relation to the question as to whether the prosecutor could tender additional expert evidence. In this application the prosecutor contends that the proceedings between the two defendants should be heard together and relies on an affidavit of Sarah Hedger dated 10 June 2025 (exhibit 1).

4. The defendants oppose the matters being heard together despite the fact that the circumstances with regard to the offending alleged against each defendant happened at the same time and with the same outcome, as the two defendants were working together on the relevant site at the time of the action.

5. The Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) (CP Act) provides there may be a joint trial if offences arise from the same set of circumstances but there may not be a joint trial if the court is of the opinion that the matters ought be heard and determined separately in the interest of justice. This is ultimately a discretionary decision.

6. Accordingly, in this Motion there are two main issues that I must decide.

1) Do the offences arise from the same set of circumstances?

2) In the interests of justice, should the matters be heard separately?

7. Both defendants do not dispute that I have the power to order that the proceedings be heard together. However, they submit that it would not be a proper exercise of my discretion to order that the matters be heard and determined together.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19886eba4fafc3fbc9ff2ed7)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.