skip navigation
Back

Prosecution Details

Offender JBT Corp Pty Ltd

Charges

Swipe to see more information
Charge Charge Number Offence Date Date Convicted Regulation Section Penalty Provision Penalty Imposed Date Sentenced
1 PE7031/09 23 March 2007 27th February 2009 3.88E(a) 1.16(2)(b)(i) $20,000.00 27th February 2009
2 PE7032/09 23 March 2007 27th February 2009 3.88E(b) 1.16(2)(b)(i) $20,000.00 27th February 2009
3 PE7033/09 23 March 2007 27th February 2009 3.88J(1)(b) 1.16(2)(b)(i) $20,000.00 27th February 2009
Description of Breach(es)

Charge 1 - On 23 March 2007 JBT Corp Pty Ltd, being the main contractor at a construction site at 47 Oxford Close, West Leederville, failed to ensure that the fixing of a concrete panel for the incorporation of the panel as a wall at the construction site was in accordance with Australian Standard 3850 section 7; contrary to regulations 3.88E(a) and 1.16 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996.

 

Charge 2 - On 23 March 2007 JBT Corp Pty Ltd, being the main contractor at a construction site at 47 Oxford Close, West Leederville, failed to ensure that the removal of temporary bracing of a concrete panel at the construction site was in accordance with Australian Standard 3850 section 7; contrary to regulations 3.88E(b) and 1.16 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996..

 

Charge 3 - On 23 March 2007 JBT Corp Pty Ltd, being a person who - at a construction site where tilt-up work was proposed to be done - had control of the workplace at 47 Oxford Close, West Leederville, failed to ensure that each person involved in the work had completed an approved course for persons involved in tilt-up work concerning the aspect of the tilt-up work in which that person was involved; contrary to regulations 3.88J(1)(b) and 1.16 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996.

Background Details

In August 2006 the accused was contracted to construct a new office/warehouse located at 47 Oxford Close, West Leederville (the "Construction Site").

At all relevant times, the accused oversaw all aspects of the construction, organised the work schedules, and was the main contractor at the Construction Site. The construction included the erection of tilt-up concrete panels.

The accused contracted a company to supply and install the concrete panels. Part of that installation work was the removal of the temporary braces once the concrete panels were incorporated into the structure.

The company supplied the precast concrete panels but contracted a rigging company to erect them and remove the braces upon completion of the installation of the structural steel.

The rigging company was also contracted directly by the accused to erect the structural steel and the roof framing.

On 20 March 2007 the rigging company commenced the installation of the steel roof frames and the structural steel. The precast concrete panels had already been erected and braced.

On 21 March 2007, at the request of the accused's site supervisor, a structural engineer conducted an inspection of the concrete panels, for the purposes of seeking approval for the removal of the braces.

Later that day, the engineer telephoned the site supervisor and advised him of a number of tasks that had to be completed in order to stabilise the concrete panels, prior to the removal of the braces.

The site supervisor went on leave at close of business on 21 March 2007.

Prior to going on leave, the site supervisor arranged for a carpenter engaged by the accused to oversee the work being performed at the Construction Site in his absence. The site supervisor provided the carpenter with a list of the tasks to be performed prior to the removal of the braces.

On 23 March 2007 the carpenter met with a rigging supervisor from the rigging company at the Construction Site and discussed what work had to be completed.

The carpenter instructed the rigging supervisor to secure the concrete panels to the steel roof framing and then remove the braces, which were bolted in place. No further engineering inspection had taken place prior to this instruction to remove the braces.

The rigging supervisor and another employee of the rigging company commenced the task of drilling into the panels, bolting them to the steel roof, and then unbolting and removing the braces.

The rigging supervisor and the other employee were required at another construction site later that morning, and so handed over the completion of the task to two other riggers employed by the rigging company.

The rigging supervisor left the Construction Site at approximately 10.45 am.

At approximately 11.00 am, one of the riggers unbolted and removed the brace supporting one of the concrete panels prior to securing that panel to the steel roof. As a result, the panel fell outwards to the ground towards Cambridge Street, West Leederville. No one was injured.

The panel in question was 7825 mm high and 2500 mm wide, and weighed 7 tonnes.

The rigger's failure to fix the concrete panel to the steel roof framing prior to removing the brace contravened Australian Standard 3850, section 7.1 [Charge 1].

The rigging supervisor's instruction to the riggers to remove the braces prior to the structure being inspected to ensure that all structural elements affecting stability were securely fixed to the concrete contravened Australian Standard 3850, section 7.2 [Charge 2].

One of the riggers involved in the tilt-up work being performed at the Construction Site, had not completed an approved course for persons involved in tilt-up work [Charge 3].




Outcome Summary

Plead Guilty

Court Magistrates Court of Western Australia - Perth
Costs $738.70

Search the records of all successful prosecutions taken by WorkSafe under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 and Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996 since 1st January 2005. Searching and indexing of this database is limited to convictions for offences against the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 and Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996 committed on or after 1 January 2005, when the statutory offence and penalty regimes were significantly amended.

Offences committed prior to 1 January 2005, while of limited comparative relevance, can be accessed via the following link.