Court outcomes

Examples of court orders made in respect of HVNL offences.

ID# Date Court Section/Act Party in CoR Fine Costs Other orders

 

4 September 2018

Ceduna

228(1)

Driver  

$2500

$520

Licence disqualified for 3 mths.

A solo heavy vehicle driver was charged with one count of driving while fatigued.  He had been observed driving on the wrong side of the road at various times over about a 10 minute period. His licence was disqualified as he posed a significant public risk.

 

 

3 December 2018

Ceduna

250(1()(a)

250(1)(b)

Driver  

$1000

$570

Licence disqualified for 9 mths.

A solo driver operating under standard hours breached work and rest hours requirements by driving for 13 hours in a 24 hour period (substantial risk) and for resting only for 4.50 hours in a 24 hour period. (critical risk) When being previously convicted of similar offences he had been warned that further offending would result in licence disqualification. 

 

 

 

30 January 2019

Adelaide

325(1)

325(1)

325(1)

Driver

$3000

$3000

$3000

(total $9000)

$630

 

A NSW licensed driver made false entries in his work diary, stating that he had been resting at a time when in fact he had been driving, loading or refuelling a vehicle. The driver had one prior similar offence from 2017 when he was fined $900.

 

 

30 January 2019

Adelaide

96(1)

Operator

$6000

$310

 

The company arranged for a drop deck trailer to be attached to its prime mover and gave instructions about how to load the trailer.  There were no weighing devices on the trailer and the load exceeded the legal limit – of 20 tonnes – by almost 6 tonnes.  The company had no prior relevant convictions.

 

 

5 March 2019

Port Adelaide

250(1()(a)

325(1)

250(1)(b)

250(1()(a)

 

Driver  

$3000

$1800

$3000

$1800

(total $9600)

$460

Convictions recorded

The Defendant was an employee driver with four previous convictions for critical breaches of work and rest hours. He committed Counts 1 to 3 in a two month period and committed Count 4 shortly afterwards. 

 

5 March 2019

Port Adelaide

254(1)(b)

254(1)(b)

Driver  

$2400

$2400

(total $4800)

$310

Convictions recorded

The solo driver of a prime mover operating under BFM hours rested for less than the minimum 7 hours of continuous rest time in a 24 hr period.

 

 

5 March 2019

Port Adelaide

250(1)(b)

250(1)(a)

250(1)(b)

Driver  

$1800

$1800

$1800

(total $5400)

$310

Convictions recorded

The solo driver of a prime mover rested for less than the minimum 7 hours of continuous rest time in a 24 hr period and worked for more than the maximum period of 12 hours stated in the standard hours in a 24 hour period.

 

 

4 March 2019

Adelaide

250(1)(a)

250(1)(b)

Driver

$8000

$470

 

In a 7 day period, a solo driver had not taken the required 24 hr continuous rest break, but had only taken 21 hrs and 45 minutes. In a 24 hr period, the driver had exceeded the permitted maximum of 12 hours, working for 13 hours and 45 minutes. The driver had previously been convicted of a loading offence but not of any fatigue offences.

 

 

 20 May 2019

Charters Towers

250(1)(a) x 9 

250(1)(b)

Driver  

 $5000

 

 

Transport inspectors intercepted a road train and inspected the driver’s work diary.  They found nine instances of the driver exceeding the maximum 12 hours work time in a 24 hr period.   In three cases the driver had worked for 14 hours (severe risk breach). There were also 2 sever breaches, 2 substantial breaches and 2 minor breaches. The driver had also breached the minimum rest requirements by having only 6 hrs of stationary rest in the 24 hr period.

 

 

 13 May 2019

Holland Park  

96(1) x 2

Driver only

$4000

 

 

Transport inspectors intercepted and weighed a vehicle. The mass on the steer axle was 8.28t which was 138% of the permissible mass of 6t. (Severe risk breach).  The mass on the single drive (dual tyres) axle was 15.32t which was 170% of the mass permitted (severe risk breach). 

 

 

 1 May 2019

Rockhampton

102(1)

96(1)

 Driver  

$3000  

 

 

A heavy vehicle transporting logs was directed to an inspection station. The mass on the rear drive axle (dual tyres) was 12.47t which was 138% of the permitted mass (Severe risk breach).  The rear overhang was measured at 3.47m which was more than 80mm longer than the maximum rear overhang of 2.22m (Severe risk breach).

 

 

 13 May 2019

Southport

96(1) x 2

183 x 2  

(Pre 1 October 18)

Director

 

$3000

$1727

 

 

The steer axle of a heavy vehicle was loaded at 120% of the applicable mass limit and the drive axle was loaded at 118% of the limit.  The director of the company was not aware of the mass limits that applied to the vehicle. The loading machinery used by the company had no weighing equipment attached. There was no formal training or induction process for new drivers.  The company was charged and convicted under (repealed) extended liability provisions. 

 

 

 13 May 2019

Southport

96(1) x 2

(Pre 1 October 18)

Driver

$1727

 

 

The steer axle of a heavy vehicle was loaded at 120% of the applicable mass limit and the drive axle was loaded at 118% of the limit.     

 

 

 9 May 2019

Rockhampton

 102(1)(b)

 Driver

 

 

 

A heavy vehicle was directed to an inspection centre where it was inspected and measured. Its width, including the load, was 2.68m which is 18cm more than the 2.5m width limit (a severe risk breach).

 

 

14 February 2019

Townsville

250(1)(a) x 5

250(1)(b) x 2

Driver

$5000

 

 

Inspection of a driver’s work diary indicated 7 breaches of work and rest hours ( a critical risk breach, a severe risk breach, 3 substantial risk breaches and a minor risk breach).  The first offence had occurred only two days after a licence suspension had been lifted. The driver did not understand how to count time and record it in a work diary.

 

 

14 February 2019

Rockhampton

96(1)

102(1)

250(1)(b)

 Driver

$4439

 

 

A combination carrying an excavator was intercepted. The driver was not operating under a permit or Notice. The mass on the quad axle group of the low loader was 203% of the permissible mass (a severe risk breach). The length of the combination exceeded the dimension limit by 1.4m (a severe risk breach). The driver had had rested for only 6.5 continuous hours, half an hour less than the minimum 7 hrs rest in a24 hr period (a minor risk breach).

 

 

14 February 2019

 Rockhampton

111(1)

102(1)

 Driver

 $2200

 

 

Inspectors observed that the load projecting from the rear of the vehicle appeared non-compliant to dimension requirements. Inspectors also witnessed some of the load shift and dislodge towards the rear of the vehicle when cornering and accelerating. The load of square metal posts dislodged under normal driving conditions and the restraints used were inadequate to prevent movement.  The rear overhang exceeded the allowable limit by 1.6 metres.

 

 

26 February 2019

 Ipswich

702(1)

250(1)(a)

Driver  

$1750

 

 

Transport inspectors compared entries in a driver’s work diary with information from the ANPR camera network and identified two false entries in the diary. The diary also showed that on one occasion the driver had worked for 12¾ hours in a 24 hour period (a minor risk breach).

 

 

 4 February 2019

Holland Park

 96(1)

 Driver

 $1500

 

 

Transport inspectors intercepted a prime mover towing a tri-axle trailer. The mass on the tandem axle group (with dual tyres) on the prime mover was 132% of the maximum permitted mass (a severe risk breach).   

 

 

 1 March 2019

Pine Rivers

250(1)(a) x 7

250(1)(b) x 6

Driver

$7000

 

 

The driver of a heavy vehicle gave his work diary to inspectors.  It revealed 13 work and rest hour breaches in as many days. These included 6 critical risk breaches, 2 severe risk breaches,   2 substantial risk breaches and 3 minor risk breaches.  The driver stated that his employer had not taken into account poor road conditions that slowed down the journey. The driver said he had exceeded his work time and reduced his rest time in order to meet his employer’s requirements.

 

 

 18 March 2019

Rockhampton

 250(1)(a) x 6

Driver

$5500

 

 

Transport inspectors reviewed a driver’s work diary and found 6 breaches of work hour limits. On two occasions the driver had driven for 15 hrs in a 24 hr period which is 3 hrs more than the permissible 12 hrs (critical risk breaches). There was another critical risk breach, two severe risk breaches and a substantial risk breach.

 

 

 6 March 2019

Oakey

702(1)

250(1)(b)

Driver

$2500

 

 

Transport inspectors reviewed a driver’s work diary and found that he had made false statements about the odometer reading of the vehicle.  In a seven day period, the longest period of continuous rest taken by the driver was only 16 ½ hours when the minimum rest requirement is 24 hrs of continuous rest (a critical risk breach).

 

 

 12 March 2019

Toowoomba

250(1)(a)

Driver

 $1650

 

 

A driver’s work diary showed that he had worked for 13 ¾ in a 24 hr period which is 1 ¾ more than the maximum permitted work limit of 12 hours  which is  a critical breach.   

 

 

12 March 2019

Toowoomba

102(1)

Driver

$1100

 

 

A prime mover towing a semi-trailer was intercepted in a suburban area. The trailer was 2.98 metres wide, almost 50cm more than the permitted maximum width of 2.5 metres ( a severe risk breach).

 

 

4 March 2019

Toowoomba

96(1)

Driver $1100

 

 

 

The assessed mass on the single axle fitted with single tyres of a heavy vehicle was 7.22t which is 120% of the permitted mass ( a severe risk breach).

 

 

 8 March 2019

Beenleigh

322(2) x 10  

Driver  $1000

 

 

 

When transport inspectors reviewed the driver’s work diary they found that all the yellow and pink duplicates of each of 10 pages were still present in the diary and had not been provided to the driver’s record keeper.

 

 

 26 April 2019

Townsville

111(1)

89(1)

96(1)

129(3)

 

250(1)(a) x 4

250(1)(b) x 2

297(2)

293(1)(b)

 

 Driver

$5000

$3500

$3500

$648

 

$7000

(for all fatigue offences)

 

(total $19 648)

 

 

A prime mover was towing a trailer carrying a Hitachi wheel loader, empty pallets and tyres.  A tyre fell from the trailer and crossed the road in front of an oncoming passenger bus. The prime mover had a tyre missing from the front axle and a split tyre on another axle.  The vehicle’s windscreen was cracked, the rocker box and leaf springs needed maintenance, hydraulic fluid was leaking and there were worn brakes on the trailer. The mass on the tri-axle group was 26.7t which was 133% of the permitted mass limit (a severe risk breach).  The vehicle did not have an “Oversize” sign.  Inspection of the driver’s work diary revealed several occasions where the driver had exceeded maximum work hours or did not rest for the required minimum rest period as well as numerous instances where information was required to be recorded but had been omitted.

 

 

 15 April 2019

Cleveland

 

250(1)(a)

250(1)(b)

 Driver

$5000

 

 

When inspected, the driver’s work diary showed that the driver had worked for 17½ hrs in a 24 hr period which is 5½ hrs more than the maximum (a critical risk breach).  In the same period, the driver had only had 4¼hrs of continuous stationary rest, not the required period of 7 hrs (a critical risk breach).

 

 

 12 April 2019

Boulia

 250(1)(a)

 Driver

 

 

 

Transport inspectors intercepted a heavy vehicle and inspected the driver’s work diary.  They found that in a 24 hr period he had worked for a total of 15 ½  hrs which is 3½ hrs more than the maximum permitted period of work (a critical risk breach).   

 

 

 2 April 2019

Brisbane

96(1)

250(1)(a)

Driver

 $2250

 

 

A heavy combination was being used to transport boxes of explosives. The mass on the tandem axle was 20.3t which exceeded the applicable mass limit (a severe risk breach).  The driver’s work diary indicated that he had worked for a total of 13¾ hrs in a 24 hr period, (a critical risk breach).

 

 

13 December 2018

Toowoomba

96(1)

183

(Pre 1 October 18)

Company

$10 000

 

 

A heavy vehicle combination transporting a scraper was the subject of a permit however the mass limit of the permit was breached and the vehicle was assessed at general mass limits. The mass on the quad axle group (dual tyres) of the trailer was 205% of the maximum mass limit (a severe risk breach). The mass on the tandem axle group of the trailer (dual tyres) was 114% of the maximum permitted mass (a substantial risk breach). 

 

 

15 January 2019

 Mackay

 96(1)

Driver

 

 

 

A combination was transporting a dragline bucket and operating under a mass permit.  The mass condition of the permit was breached and the vehicle was assessed at general mass limits.  The mass on the quad axle group (dual tyres) of the trailer was 295% of the permitted mass (a severe risk breach). The masses on two tandem axle groups (dual tyres) were 112% and 122% of the permitted mass  and the mass on the single steer axle group was 109$ of the permitted mass (3 substantial risk breaches).

 

 

18 December 2018

 Ipswich

96(1) x 2

Driver

 $4500

 

 

A truck loaded with clean fill was intercepted and weighed.  The mass on the single drive axle (dual tyres) was 157% of the maximum allowable mass (a severe risk breach). The GVM of the vehicle was 146% of the maximum allowable mass (a severe risk breach). 

#2018002 14/11/18 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court s 229 HVNL x 2
(pre 1/10/18 offence)
Company/owner $21,600 (global penalty) $160 victims of crime levy per count (total $320) plus $150 prosecution fee Conviction recorded

An Adelaide based trucking company was prosecuted for two offences against s 229 of the HVNL (pre 1 October 2018 offending).

An investigation into the company was commenced after one of its drivers was involved in a collision. The trucks operated by the company were fitted with GPS and GPS data was readily available to the company. The company failed to access the GPS data or cross-check GPS records with drivers’ work diaries. Had the company accessed the GPS data it would have been alerted to indications that two drivers were committing extreme breaches of the fatigue regulations of the HVNL. Section 229 does not require proof that a driver was in fact driving fatigued – it is simply a failure to take reasonable steps to ensure that a person does not drive on the road while impaired by fatigue. Thus in failing to cross-check GPS with work diaries for these two drivers – which would have been a reasonable step – the company committed two offences against s 229 of the HVNL.

As the defendant was a company, the operation of s 596 meant that the maximum penalty for each of the two offences was $55,000 dollars (5 times the $11,000 maximum penalty for an s 229 offence). The Magistrate reduced the proposed a fine of $36,000 by 40% in recognition of the pleas of guilty on the first occasion the matter was in Court. This resulted in a global fine of $21,600 plus victims of crime levies and prosecutors fees.

 
#2018001 12/11/18 Murray Bridge Magistrates Court s 111(1) HVNL
s 114 HVNL
Owner driver $4,230 $160 victims of crime levy plus $150 prosecution fee Conviction recorded
An owner driver of a truck and trailer was carrying firewood in steel cages measuring 1m x 1m x 1m. Two cages of firewood were loaded onto the rear of the truck but two empty cages each weighing 240kg were sitting, unrestrained, on the rear of the trailer. While driving down the South Eastern Freeway the driver applied the hand brake in order to avoid another vehicle in rainy conditions. An empty cage fell from the rear of the trailer. The driver was unaware that the cage had fallen off his vehicle until stopped by police some distance down the freeway. Police had been contacted by a member of the public who saw the cage fall from the vehicle.