The Court held that where a company is effectively a one-person operation, there is a very substantial overlap between the PCBU's failure to take reasonably practicable measures and the director's failure to exercise due diligence, and this overlap is a relevant consideration both in determining penalty and in considering a s 10 application. The Court declined to make a s 10 order for the director despite his need to travel to China for medical treatment, holding that evidence of an unspecified delay in obtaining a visa due to disclosing a criminal conviction did not amount to exceptional circumstances, particularly where the consequences of disclosure were unknown and urgent medical needs would need to be addressed in Australia regardless. The offences were assessed as mid-range objective seriousness notwithstanding that safety systems existed, because those systems were insufficiently implemented and the principal contractor failed to consult with the scaffolding subcontractor about the intended rooftop use of mobile scaffolds.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.