Road managers
Accessibility tools
Court orders
Court orders made in respect of HVNL offences.
New South Wales
| Court details | Offence | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
|
16 April 2024 Blacktown Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 12600 |
The defendant was charged with making a false or misleading entry in their work record. On 12 September 2023 at Huntingwood the defendant produced a National Work Diary. The defendant recorded they were the driver of a fatigue regulated heavy vehicle and that they were resting at Dubbo from 10.45pm to 11.15pm on 11 September 2023. The defendant signed the work diary page declaring it to be true and correct. Such entry being false or misleading as the vehicle was sighted by Safe-T-Cam driving north on the Mitchell Highway at Cundumbul at 10.44pm. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Educational points
|
|
15 April 2024 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 8713 |
On 5 February 2023 at 4:11am Authorised Officers of the NHVR detected a heavy vehicle travelling on Hume Highway which failed to enter the Marulan North Avoidance Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. On 8 February 2023, Authorised Officers sent a Notice to Produce to the registered owner of the vehicle, requesting the name and residential address of the driver of vehicle on 5 February 2023 at 4:11am. The registered operator was required to reply within 21 days. The NHVR did not receive any reply to the Notice to Produce dated 8 February 2023. On 12 April 2023, Authorised Officers sent a second Notice to Produce to the registered owner of the vehicle. The registered operator was required to reply within 14 days. The NHVR did not receive any reply to the second Notice dated 12 April 2023. The matter was before the Parramatta Local Court on the 15 April 2024. There was no appearance by the accused. The Magistrate granted leave to have the matter heard by ex parte after proof of service was tendered. The Magistrate convicted and fined the accused $10,000. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
8 April 2024 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 19579 |
At about 11:48am on Monday, 27 November 2023, an NHVR Safety and Compliance Officer (SCO) stopped a heavy vehicle for a compliance check because they observed the left rear door of the body was open swinging towards the nature strip and gutter, and struck the mirror of a parked articulated combination. The accused drove a rigid truck loaded with 2 x pallets of general freight. The SCO measured it and found the width was 3.65 metres due to its open left rear door. It was more than the prescribed limit of 2.50 metres. It is more than 2.50 metres plus 80 mm (2.58 metres) (severe risk breach). |
Section/Act
Fine
Educational points
|
|
5 April 2024 Goulburn Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 20198 |
The defendant was intercepted by NHVR authorised officers. Upon inspection of the defendant’s work diary, the authorised officers identified a breach of the HVNL between 10:45pm on 3 December 2023 and 10:45pm on 4 December 2023 when the defendant had 5 hours of continuous stationary rest time within the 24-hour period. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) An 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
3 April 2024 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 24379 |
On 9 January 2024, Authorised Officers of the NHVR observed a heavy vehicle travelling on Pacific Highway at Mount White. The Authorised Officers intercepted the vehicle, spoke to the driver, and inspected the vehicle, its components, and its load. The accused permitted a person, to drive the vehicle from Penrith NSW to Mount White NSW The vehicle's permitted axle group mass was 16.5 tonnes. The vehicle's axle group mass was weighed at 21.8 tonnes. Taking into account the applicable mass adjustment, the vehicle's alleged axle mass was 21.3 tonnes, an excess mass of 4.8 tonnes, or an overload of 129%. The contravention of the vehicle's permitted mass resulted in a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
27 March 2024 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 17398 |
On 17 July 2023, Authorised Officers of the NHVR detected a heavy vehicle travelling Northbound on the M1 Pacific Motorway, Mt White NSW and an inspection was conducted on the vehicle. The vehicle was carrying a load of building materials and supplies on a journey from Unanderra NSW to Glendale NSW at a GVM of 25.1 tonnes. Defence sought a no conviction order after providing subjective material of an apology letter and honest mistake. Prosecutor opposed no conviction due to previous conviction history for same offence and the company is still reoffending. Prosecution submitted public safety risks of vehicle braking distance diminished due to heavy axle and also wear and tear of road infrastructure when overloaded. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
22 March 2024 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 12303 |
The defendant company was charged with permitting a driver to drive an over length vehicle on a road. The heavy vehicle was intercepted on 27 August 2023 by NHVR Safety Compliance Officers at Marulan NSW. It was measured and found to be over-length. The prescribed length limit of the heavy vehicle was 19 meters. The assessed length of the heavy vehicle was 19.68 meters. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
1 March 2024 Newcastle Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8857 |
The defendant was charged with one charge of making a false or misleading entry offence, and two fatigue related offences. The defendant did not appear at sentence. The NHVR submitted that the false and misleading entry offences masked the fatigue offences, which posed a risk to public safety. NHVR noted the defendant’s two prior HVNL convictions. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
28 February 2024 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 9317 |
The defendant was charged with making a false or misleading entry in their work diary. The heavy vehicle was intercepted on 1 July 2023 by NHVR Safety Compliance Officers at Chinderah NSW. The defendant had made a false and misleading entry in their work diary where they recorded they were resting at a time they were working as evidenced by the production of a weighbridge docket. |
Section/Act
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) An SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
28 February 2024 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8591 |
The defendant was charged with “solo driver work more than standard maximum time critical risk”. On 27 April 2023 the defendant was intercepted by NHVR Safety Compliance Officers at Chinderah. An inspection of the defendant’s work diary found that between 10:15pm on 24 April 2023 and 10:15pm on 25 April 2023 the defendant had worked for 14 hours and 30 minutes. The maximum work time in any 24 hour period is 12 hours. The defendant had two prior work diary offences. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) An SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
23 February 2024 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7333 |
The defendant was convicted by the court on 16 charges contrary to the HVNL. The charges were a number of obstructing an authorised officer, failure to provide a licence or work diary, failure to comply with direction to not move a vehicle, failure to comply with the requirement to provide journey information, failure to record information in a work diary. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Other Orders:
|
|
21 February 2024 Belmont Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 15261 |
The defendant company was charged with permitting a driver to drive an over mass heavy vehicle on a road. The heavy vehicle was intercepted on 29 September 2023 by NHVR Safety Compliance Officers at Botany, NSW. It was weighed and was found to be over-mass. The assessed gross mass was 11.9 tonnes with the allowable mass limit being 8.7 tonnes. This was a severe risk breach and was 136.78% of the permissible mass. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
14 February 2024 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 9516 |
The Defendant company was charged with permitting a driver to drive an over length vehicle on a road. The heavy vehicle was intercepted on 30 June 2023 by NHVR Safety Compliance Officers at Mount White NSW. It was measured and was found to be over-length. The prescribed length limit of the heavy vehicle was 26 meters. The assessed length of the heavy vehicle was 26.64 meters. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) An SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
13 December 2023 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 9584 |
The defendant was charged with one count of a solo driver resting less than the standard rest time (critical risk). |
Section/Act
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) An SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
8 December 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 9428 |
In the 24-period from 7.00pm on 20 July 2023 and 7.00pm on 21 July 2023 the offender did work for 16 hours and 45 minutes. Maximum work hours permitted 12 hours. In the 24-hour period 7.00pm 20 July 2023 to 7.00pm 21 July 2023 the offender did rest for 5 hours. Minimum required rest hours is 7 hours. In the 24-period from 7.00pm 24 July 2023 and 7.00pm 25 July 2023 the offender did work for 14 hours and 45 minutes. Maximum work hours permitted 12 hours. In the 24-hour period 5.00pm 27 July 2023 to 5.00pm 28 July 2023 the offender did rest for 4 hours. Minimum required rest hours is 7 hours |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) An SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
8 December 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8469 |
A heavy vehicle was detected travelling between Safe-T-Cam sites in less than the allowable travel time. The accused worked 15 hours 15 minutes when maximum permitted work time was 12 hours in any 24-hour period. The accused rested 3 hours when minimum continuous rest required was 7 hours in any 24-hour period. The accused failed to appear and was convicted and sentenced in their absence. |
Section/Act
Fine
|
|
7 December 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 9550 |
In a 24-hour period the prescribed standard maximum work time was 12 hours. The offender worked a total of 14 hours. The offender had a history of non-compliance with the HVNL. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) An SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
7 December 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 8449 |
The defendant company was charged with permitting a driver to drive an over mass heavy vehicle on a road. The heavy vehicle was intercepted on 4 May 2023 by NHVR Safety Compliance Officers at Villawood NSW. It was weighed and was found to be over mass. The first axle group weighed 8.25 tonnes with the allowable mass limit being 6.5 tonnes. This was a severe risk breach and was 126.92% of the permissible weight for that axle group. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
7 December 2023 Oberon Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 13257 |
Driver rested 4 hours when the minimum continuous stationary rest required was 7 hours in any 24-hour period. |
Section/Act
Fine
|
|
30 November 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8874 |
The defendant was charged with two counts of solo driver works more than standard maximum time (critical risk); one count of a solo driver resting less than the minimum time (critical risk); and one count of a solo driver resting less than the minimum time (severe risk). |
Section/Act
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) SIO was ordered. |
|
29 November 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 9618 |
The accused was the driver of a heavy vehicle with a gross vehicle mass (GVM) exceeding 12 tonnes, constituting a fatigue regulated heavy vehicle. In the 24-hour period, the prescribed Basic Fatigue Management (BFM) minimum continuous rest time was 7 hours. The longest period of continuous rest achieved by the accused was 3 hours and 30 minutes. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
29 November 2023 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8590 |
The offender recorded that they were resting from 10pm on 23 April 2023 until 5pm on 24 April 2023. The vehicle driven by the offender was detected by a traffic enforcement device at 6:36am and 2:08pm on 24 April 2023. The offender recorded that they were resting from 4:45am on 25 April 2023 to 6pm on 26 April 2023. The accused made admissions to commencing work at 7:30am on 26 April 2023. The offender produced a delivery docket confirming they collected goods for delivery at 11am on 26 April 2023. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
29 November 2023 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7824, 8617 |
As part of a compliance check Authorised Officers inspected the accused’s work diary and detected seven fatigue offences between 21 March 2023 and 11 April 2023. The defendant entered pleas of guilty to all seven offences. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
29 November 2023 Tenterfield Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7501 |
The defendant was charged with one count of a solo driver working more than the standard maximum time (critical risk). The defendant had two previous heavy vehicle offences - driving an unregistered heavy vehicle and following too closely in a heavy vehicle. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
24 November 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8793 |
The accused failed to exit the Hume Highway and enter the Marulan North Heavy Vehicle Safety Station (“HVSS”). After the accused failed to enter the HVSS, the vehicle stopped in lane one of the Hume Highway adjacent to the HVSS. The vehicle commenced reversing along the road, against the flow of traffic. The accused brought the vehicle to a complete stop after reversing continuously for some time. As the driver manoeuvred the vehicle to a position that would allow them to enter the HVSS, the vehicle crossed into lane two on more than one occasion. On at least one occasion, the vehicle was positioned simultaneously across lane one, two and the shoulder of the road. During the incident 20 light vehicles passed the reversing combination with all taking evasive action to maintain separation. One vehicle was towing a trailer. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
|
|
23 November 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8871 |
On 14 June 2023 at Pemulwuy in NSW, NHVR Authorised Officers detected a white Western Star Prime Mover towing a trailer on Bellevue Crt that was over width where the prescribed allowable width was 2.5 meters and the assessed width was 2.58 meters. This constituted a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
23 November 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8076 |
A solo driver worked more than the standard maximum time under fatigue laws. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
|
|
10 November 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 8341 |
The company permitted a driver to drive a heavy vehicle with non-compliant dimensions. |
Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): An SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
7 November 2023 Coffs Harbour Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8665 |
The Defendant submitted Work Diary records for inspection in accordance with the Law. The Work Diary records stated that the Defendant recorded a rest break at Yatala, Queensland at 4:00am on 31 May 2023. However, a Safe-T-Cam sighting at Tweed Heads, New South Wales detected the Defendant’s heavy vehicle at 4:26am on 31 May 2023. The Defendant made a false and misleading entry into their Work Diary. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
6 November 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7078 |
The defendant was charged with one count of driving while disqualified. This was the driver's first offence under s.54(1) of the Road Transport Act. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
|
|
6 November 2023 Hay Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8720 |
The defendant was driving a heavy vehicle which was intercepted by Authorised Officers for an inspection. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected a breach of the defendant’s Work Diary where the defendant had worked for a total of 18 hours and 30 minutes, when the maximum permissible work hours are 14 hours under basic fatigue management. This breach constituted a critical risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
1 November 2023 Sydney Downing Centre Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 4111 |
Authorised Officers investigated the Company which revealed 543 contraventions of the Law. Amongst those offences, Authorised Officers detected:
|
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 12-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
20 October 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7633 |
The offender made admissions under caution that they had driven their vehicle during the period recorded as rest on two occasions. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
19 October 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8735 |
The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator detected offences via Safe-T-Cam. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers issued a Notice to Produce to the defendant. The defendant complied with the Notice to Produce and offences were confirmed for fatigue related breaches. The breaches were that the defendant had, in a 24-hour period, a maximum continuous rest break of 5 hours and 15 minutes. The legal requirement is a 7-hour continuous rest break in a 24-hour period. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
19 October 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8131 |
In a two-month period, two heavy vehicles registered to the individual were detected by Safe-T-Cameras. Safe-T-Cameras detected the heavy vehicles to have committed a fatigue offence. As a result of the detected offences, 6 compulsory notices were issued to the individual requesting details of the driver where no notices were responded. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
16 October 2023 Albury Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8848 |
The defendant was driving a heavy vehicle and was instructed to pull over for an inspection. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected a breach in the defendant’s Work Diary where the defendant had 4-and-a-half-hours continuous rest in a 24-hour period. The breach constituted a critical risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 9-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
13 October 2023 Gundagai Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8216 |
The defendant was intercepted by Authorised Officers and a routine inspection commenced. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers asked for the defendant’s Work Diary which the defendant did not possess; however, supplementary Work Diary sheets were provided. Authorised Officers inspected the supplementary Work Diary sheets which were deemed false and misleading entries as Safe-T-Camera entries detected the heavy vehicle at different locations. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 12-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
12 October 2023 Wollongong Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7863 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers for a compliance check. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected two offences, an over width and over mass. The prescribed width limit to the heavy vehicle was 2.5-meters, and the assessed width of the heavy vehicle was 2.625 meters. The offence constituted a severe risk breach. The prescribed mass limit over the first axle group applicable to the vehicle was 6 tonnes, and the assessed axle mass was 7.40 tonnes. This amounted to 118% of the maximum mass permitted which constituted a substantial risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
10 October 2023 Glenn Innes Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7668 |
The accused was charged with three counts of make false or misleading entry in Work Diary. Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle which the defendant was the operator. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers identified numerous breaches. For the three offences, the defendant recorded that he was resting; however, Safety-Cameras detected the heavy vehicle travelling at the times the defendant recorded as rest. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
27 September 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 7615, 8607 |
The defendant was charged with permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass on two separate occasions. On one occasion, Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle which was registered to the Company. The alleged mass was 107.82 tonnes, 226.99% of the maximum permissible general mass limit. On the second occasion, Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle which was registered to the Company. On this occasion, the heavy vehicle was over mass on the second axle group which was 20.46 tonnes or a mass equalling 124% of the maximum permissible general mass limit. Both offences were severe risk breaches. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
26 September 2023 Grafton Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 5467 |
A heavy vehicle combination was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected that the heavy vehicle’s trailer tri-axle mass exceeded the prescribed mass limit by 4.84 tonnes. The tri-axle was loaded at 124.20% of its permitted mass. The driver advised he had not received training for loading heavy vehicles from the corporate defendant and had no means of weighing the heavy vehicle. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
22 September 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8826, 8941, 9023, 9274 |
The defendant was a repeat offender whom was stopped and inspected by Authorised Officers on numerous occasions. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected the defendant had deliberately not filled in their Work Diary. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 12-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
22 September 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7576 |
The top barge on the trailer filled with 4 tonne of water after being left out in the weather, putting the load over when stopped at Marulan. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 12-month SIO was ordered. |
|
21 September 2023 Campbelltown Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8779 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected a fatigue related breach in the defendant’s Work Diary for working more than the maximum hours. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 9-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
21 September 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8037 |
The defendant was detected via Safe-T-Cam monitoring. For two offences, the defendant was detected to be driving for a 52-hour period, where 10 hours continuous rest is the mandatory time. However, the defendant’s longest rest was 5 hours and 45 minutes for one charge, and 4 hours and 30 minutes for the second charge. These offences were in the critical fatigue category. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
21 September 2023 Parkes Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7948 (SIO) and AS 8605 |
Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle which was operated by the defendant and carried out an inspection. For one of the offences, the defendant’s longest continuous rest period was five hours, and three offences where the defendant exceeded the permissible maximum hours work hours. All four offences were in the critical risk category. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
21 September 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7660 |
The defendant was intercepted by Authorised Officers at a Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected a fatigue related offence where the defendant had rested for 4 hours and 45 minutes in a 24-hour period. This placed the offence in the critical category. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
21 September 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7444 |
The defendant was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised officers detected two fatigue breached in the defendant’s Work Diary. The offences were less than the required rest, where the defendant had 4 hours and 15 minutes in a 24-hour period; and had worked for 14 hours and 15 minutes in a 24-hour period. These constituted critical risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 9-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
19 September 2023 Cootamundra Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8524 |
The defendant was driving a heavy vehicle which was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officer identified two breaches of the defendant’s Work Diary where the defendant worked more than the standard maximum rest time; and rested less than the minimum required time. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
18 September 2023 Wyong Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 8529 |
A heavy vehicle was stopped by Authorised Officers and inspected. The inspection revealed that the heavy vehicle was carrying excavation equipment and was over mass on its second axel by 21%, and 55% on its third axle. As such, this amounted to contravention of the law, whereby the defendant Company permitted the offence to occur. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine
|
|
8 September 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7944 |
The offender was intercepted by Authorised Officers at Marulan Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers identified two fatigue related breaches when the offender had worked for 17 hours and 30 minutes and had only 2 hours and 45 minutes of continuous rest. The Authorised Officers identified a further fatigue related breach when the offender had 5 hours and 15 minutes of continuous stationary rest time. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
|
|
8 September 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 6805 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected a breach with the vehicle’s load which exceeded the permissible length and thereby constituted a breach. The defendant had three prior convictions for similar offences. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
7 September 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7276 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected that the heavy vehicle was over mass on the second axle group. The vehicle's mass over the second axle group was 19.90 tonnes, an excess mass of 3.4 tonnes, which equated to an overload of 120%. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
6 September 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 7988 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected a severe mass breach. The driver of the heavy vehicle didn’t know the vehicle, the mass limits, nor the weight of the vehicle prior to the driver’s journey. The heavy vehicle was registered to a Company which has had three prior mass related recorded offences. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
6 September 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 8594 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted and pulled over by Authorised Officers whom inspected the vehicle. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers discovered a severe category mass breach was detected. There was a gross mass breach of 8.8 tonnes, where the prescribed allowable mass was 6 tonnes, which was an overload of 146.6%. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
|
|
31 August 2023 Lithgow Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7067 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. After the interception, Authorised Officers conducted an inspection of the vehicle and the driver’s work diary. Authorised Officers identified a breach where the accused had worked more than the permitted 12 hours in any 24-hour period. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 12-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
31 August 2023 Cessnock Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6433 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers and then inspected. After the inspection, it was observed that the assessed mass of the heavy vehicle’s third axle group was 20.00 tonnes, or a mass equalling 121%, of the permitted maximum mass which made the offence a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
|
|
30 August 2023 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6289 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers noticed a severe category dimension breach. The length of the vehicle had an assessed length of 26.8 metres, where the prescribed allowable length was 26.0 metres. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
29 August 2023 Taree Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7603 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers at Jones Island Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Upon inspection of the accused’s National Driver Work Diary, Authorised Officers detected multiple breaches of the defendant’s work and rest hours over a 24-day period. The detected offences were in the critical risk category. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
|
|
25 August 2023 Lithgow Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6308 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection by Authorised Officers, a breach was detected in the driver’s Work Diary. That breach indicated that the driver had worked 14 hours and 15 minutes in the 24-hour period. The offender was only permitted to work 12 hours. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 12-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
17 August 2023 Lithgow Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6568 |
Authorised officers observed the offender to be incoherent and difficult to understand. The offender had continued to drive for one-hour after the end of a 24-hour period where he had worked for 14 hours and 30 minutes. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 12-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
15 August 2023 Katoomba Local Court Defendant type: Operator - AS 5271 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised officers at a Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. The driver of the vehicle was operating under the Class 1 Oversize Notice. The vehicle's permitted length was 19 metres; however, the vehicle was measured at 21.8 metres, and considering adjustments, the vehicle was 0.7 metres oversize. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 3-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
11 August 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7634 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers completed a compliance check and noticed a breach in the defendant’s Work Diary. The breach indicated the defendant had worked 14-and- a-half hours in a 24-hour period, when the maximum allowable hours are 12 hours. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
10 August 2023 Parkes Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7563 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers for a compliance check. In accordance with the compliance check, the defendant’s Work Diary was inspected and an offence was detected. The offence was that the defendant had worked 16 hours where the prescribed allowable maximum time was 12 hours. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
8 August 2023 Blacktown Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7430 |
The defendant was charged with one count of solo driver rest less than standard minimum rest time – critical risk. This was the third time that the defendant had breached the HVNL. The NHVR applied to the Court for a Supervisory Intervention Order on this basis, which was granted by the Magistrate whom noted the defendant had been proactive in his approach to rehabilitation. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A six-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
7 August 2023 Hay Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7486 |
A heavy vehicle was pulled over and inspected by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection, the vehicle's length was measured at 26.6 metres when it’s permitted length was 25 metres. Taking into account the applicable dimension adjustment, the vehicle's alleged length was 26.5 metres, an excess length of 1.5 metres. The contravention of the vehicle's permitted length resulted in a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine
|
|
7 August 2023 Moree Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6557 |
Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle. Upon inspection of the heavy vehicle, Authorised Officers detected that the heavy vehicle was measured at 38.9 metres when vehicle’s permissible length was 36 metres. Taking into account the applicable dimension adjustment, the vehicle's alleged length was 38.6 metres, an excess length of 2.1 metres |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
21 July 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 8009 |
A heavy vehicle was detected at a Heavy Vehicle Safety Station and the registered owner of the vehicle was sent a Notice to Produce for the driver’s Work Diary. The defendant company didn’t respond to the Notice to Produce and failed to provide a reasonable excuse. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
21 July 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7617 |
Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle which the accused was driving. Upon inspection, the Authorised Officers detected two fatigue related offences in the accused’s Work Diary. The accused had rested for approximately five hours on both occasions which is less than the required minimum time. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
20 July 2023 Kempsey Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6679 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted at Pine Creek Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Upon inspection of the driver’s National Driver Work Diary, NHVR Authorised Officers detected 3 false or misleading entries where the vehicle was sighted by Safe-T-Cameras to be driving at a time the driver recorded they were resting. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
18 July 2023 Parramatta District Court Defendant type: Individual - appeal - AS 8809 |
The accused appealed the severity of their sentence on the following charge:
|
Section/Act:
Fine:
Outcome:
|
|
12 July 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8058 |
The accused drove a fatigued related heavy vehicle. Within a 24-hour period, the accused worked for 14 hours and 45 minutes continuously, when the maximum hours are 12-hours and thereby committing a critical risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
12 July 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6503 |
The accused drove a fatigued related heavy vehicle. Within a 24-hour period the longest recorded continuous rest was 4 hours and 30 minutes, whereby 7 hours continuous rest is required. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
7 July 2023 Goulburn Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company - AS 7934 |
A vehicle consisting of a prime moving towing a trailer was inspected at an Authorised Inspection Station. The assessed mass of the vehicle’s third axle exceeded its allowable mass limit, equalling 124% of the maximum permitted mass. The defendant company had a history of offending which involved exceeding permitted mass limits dating back to 2015, and faced a maximum penalty of over $70,000. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
7 July 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 4833 |
Authorised officers intercepted a heavy vehicle, spoke to the driver, and inspected the accused’s Work Diary. Authorised officers found 20 fatigue, false and misleading and Work Diary offences. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
4 July 2023 Bathurst Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 7201 |
The width of the vehicle’s load was permitted to be 2.5 metres. The measured width was 2.76 metres. The offender was operating under the New South Wales Class 3 Baled Commodities Dimension Exemption Notice 2022. As this was breached, the allowable width returned to 2.5 metres resulting in a severe breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
22 June 2023 Liverpool Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 4663 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on Victoria St, Wetherill Park in by Authorised Officers. The vehicle’s mass exceeded the mass limit and the vehicle was found to exceed the dimension limit. The driver advised that while the heavy vehicle had weight scales fitted, they weren’t working properly. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
22 June 2023 Liverpool Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 4126 |
A breach of the primary duty (category 3) which can be categorised as:
|
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
22 June 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 7278 |
A heavy vehicle loaded with aggregate or soil was pulled over and weighed by Authorised Officers. The vehicle's permitted mass on the second axle was 9 tonnes. The vehicle's mass was 12 tonnes, an excess mass of 3 tonnes, or an overload of 133.3%. The contravention of the vehicle's permitted mass resulted in a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
22 June 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 6914 |
Failure to provide information to an Authorised Officer contrary to the law. Despite the accused’s case which was good in the circumstances, the Magistrate noted that there was a need for general and specific deterrence. Further, a clear message must be sent to companies that they have obligations to all regulatory authorities to provide information when requested. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
22 June 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 5549 |
A heavy vehicle was detected by a Safe-T-Cam site located near Mount White. The vehicle was registered to the defendant company and a Notice to Produce was sent to the Defendant Company. The defendant company did not respond to the Notice to Produce which expired on 1 August 2022. The defendant company failed to provide information to authorised officer. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
20 June 2023 Parramatta District Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8298 |
The accused appealed the severity of their sentence on the following charges:
|
Section/Act:
Fine:
Outcome:
|
|
19 June 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8378 |
The accused appealed the severity of their sentence on the following charges:
|
Section/Act:
Fine:
Outcome:
|
|
15 June 2023 Albury District Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8488 |
New South Wales Police stopped the accused at Albury for a heavy vehicle compliance check. Two fatigue offences were detected. The first charge was for resting less than the required time in a 24-hour period. The second charge was for operating under the basic fatigue management hours and continuous stationary rest. Under the Fatigue Regulation, having had less than five-and-a-half hours continuous rest constitutes a critical fatigue risk and carries a maximum penalty of $17,740. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
9 June 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7790 |
The heavy vehicle was detected travelling between Safe-T-Cam sites in less than the allowable travel time. A Notice to Produce was sent to the operator of the heavy vehicle which required the operator to provide records for the driver of the vehicle, including any certificates of accreditation and work diary records. A response was received for the accused in a two-up operators of the heavy vehicle. The accused provided the relevant documents, and upon inspection of their Work Diary, breaches were identified where less than the permitted 10 hours in any 82-hour period. The accused has rested 1 hour and 15 minutes. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
9 June 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6828 |
Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle travelling north on the Hume Highway at Marulan. During the interception, Authorised Officers inspected of the driver’s Work Diary and found three offences where the driver had worked more than the permitted 12 hours in any 24-hour period. These incidents were for trips between New South Wales and Victoria. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
8 June 2023 Parkes Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7815 |
A heavy vehicle was directed into the Daroobalgie Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Authorised offices carried out a routine inspection. Authorised Officer identified a breach where the accused had worked more than the permitted 12 hours in any 24-hour period. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
8 June 2023 Parkes Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7322 |
The accused was pulled into a Heavy Vehicle Safety Station for a compliance inspection by Authorised Officers. Upon inspection of the accused's Work Diary, breaches where identified where the accused rested less than the permitted 7 hours in any 24-hour period. |
Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
8 June 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 6584 |
The Company was the registered operator of a heavy vehicle, and permitted a person to drive a heavy vehicle that did not comply with mass requirements. The permitted mass of the vehicle’s 2nd axle group was 16.5 tonnes and the 2nd axle group was measured at 22.95 tonnes, an overload of 6.45 tonnes or 139%. The overload on the 2nd axle group resulted in a gross mass overload of 5.95 tonnes constituting a further severe risk breach. The Regulator charged the accused for the severe risk breach on the 2nd axle group. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
26 May 2023 Liverpool Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7086 |
The defendant was charged with one count of permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass which constituted a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
25 May 2023 Lithgow Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7433 |
An inspection of the driver’s Work Diary showed the driver had worked for 15 hours, when the maximum permitted work time was 12 hours, which constitutes a critical risk breach. Further inspection of the driver’s Work Diary showed, on a subsequent date, that the driver had worked for 13 hours and 25 minutes, which constitutes a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
25 May 2023 Lithgow Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7315 |
Inspection of the driver’s Work Diary showed a breach between 6.15 pm on 8 February 2023, and 6.15 pm on 9 February 2023 when the driver had only 4 hours and 45 minutes of continuous stationary rest time. The minimum required continuous rest time is 7 hours. Thereby committing a critical risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
25 May 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 5099 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on Grand Avenue, Camellia New South Wales by NHVR authorised officers. The vehicle was loaded with concrete waste and was found to exceed the permissible gross vehicle mass and the permissible mass limit on the second axle. The truck had on-board weighing devices which showed it was exceeding the gross vehicle mass. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
24 May 2023 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6665 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted at Mount White Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Upon inspection of the accused’s National Work Diary, NHVR authorised officers detected a breach of the accused's work hours where they had worked for a total of 13.75 hours when they were permitted to work only 12. The driver stated they had only been doing interstate work for about a month and didn’t know they had made a mistake. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
24 May 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7249 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on Pacific Highway at Mount White in NSW by NHVR Authorised Officers. Authorised Officers inspected the accused’s Work Diary which revealed two breaches of the HVNL. The first breach was for working over the maximum period in a 24-hour period. The driver had worked for 14 hours and 30 minutes when they were only permitted to work 12 hours. The second breach was for a false and misleading entry. The accused stated they were resting from 12:00am to 7:00am, however, the accused was detected on a road via Safe-T-Cam 33.6 kilometres from where the accused stated they were resting. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
19 May 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6621 |
The defendant was charged with one count of a solo driver resting less than the standard minimum time which is a critical risk. This was the sixth time that the defendant had breached the HVNL for a fatigue related offence. The NHVR applied to the Court for a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) on this basis. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months for the following:
|
|
19 May 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6517 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted at Marulan Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Upon inspection of the accused’s National Work Diary, NHVR authorised officers detected a breach of their work hours where they had worked for a total of 13.75 hours when they were permitted to work only 12. The driver stated that they probably didn’t look at their work diary properly and that was what caused the breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months for the following:
|
|
19 May 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5393 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted at Marulan Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. Upon inspection of the accused’s National Work Diary, NHVR authorised officers identified a breach of their work hours between 12:30am on 3 September 2022 and 12:30am on 4 September 2022. The driver had only rested for a continuous period of 5 hours when they were required to rest 7 hours. The driver said that their hours had been pushed out by waiting around for loading. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
18 May 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6681 |
The accused was pulled into the Mount Boyce Heavy Vehicle Safety Station by authorised officers. A check on the accused’s Work Diary revealed that the accused was working standard driving hours, but not resting the required amount that is required under standard hours fatigue legislation. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
15 May 2023 Dubbo Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6209 |
The accused made a false or misleading entry in their Work Diary. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 9 months with the following conditions:
|
|
9 May 2023 Broken Hill Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6507 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on Hume Highway at Coolac in NSW by NHVR authorised officers. The driver’s Work Diary contained a number of incorrect recordings when checked against Safe-T-Cam sightings. The driver had recorded resting when a Safe-T-Cam detected him driving over 1,000 kilometres away. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months for the following:
|
|
5 May 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7047 |
The Accused was intercepted by NHVR authorised officers and the Accused’s Work Diary was inspected. Upon inspection, it was detected that the Accused had failed to take the minimum requirement of 24 hours continuous rest in a 7-day period between 1:00pm on 2 January 2023 and 1:00pm 9 on January 2023. The longest continuous rest period during the 7-day period recorded was 14 hours and 45 minutes. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months for the following:
|
|
5 May 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7034 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on Hume Highway at Marulan by NHVR Authorised Officers and inspected the driver’s National Driver Work Diary. The authorised officers identified two breaches within a 24-hour period. The driver had driven for a total of 19.5 hours and had only rested for 1.5 hours. The driver was aware they were allowed to drive up to 12 hours in any 24-hour period. When asked, when they should start counting a work period, they stated at the end of a major rest break. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
4 May 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 5740 |
A heavy vehicle was detected via Safe-T-Cam avoiding the Mount Boyce East Heavy Vehicle Safety Station. NHVR Authorised Officers sent out a number of Notices to Produce to ascertain the details of the person driving the vehicle at the time of the offence. The responsible person for the vehicle failed to respond to the NHVR to provide the information requested by the authorised officers. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
4 May 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 5511 |
The defendant was charged with two counts of exceeding the maximum standard work hours and one count of exceeding the maximum standard work hours. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
28 April 2023 Liverpool Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5871 |
A heavy vehicle was detected travelling between Safe-T-Cam sites in less than the allowable travel time. A Notice to Produce was sent to the registered operator of the heavy vehicle requesting Work Diary records for the relevant period. The accused was nominated as the driver by the registered operator and all relevant Work Diary records were provided. A check on the accused’s Work Diary revealed that the accused was working under standard driving hours. Upon inspection of the accused’s Work Diary, entries of three critical breach fatigue offences were detected. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months for the following:
|
|
26 April 2023 Temora Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 7041 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on the Newell Highway at West Wyalong and eight fatigue offences were detected. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12-months with the following conditions:
|
|
21 April 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Operator - AS 5385 |
A Prime Mover was directed into the Marulan heavy vehicle safety station for a compliance check. During the compliance check of the heavy vehicle dimension issues were detected with the vehicle’s overall width of the load. The vehicle and the loads overall width was measured at 2.66 metres. The allowable width of the vehicle was 2.50 metres. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12-month SIO for training to all directors, senior management and persons responsible for the operations if transport activities within the company. Training must include training in respect of:
|
|
21 April 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5672 |
The defendant was charged with one count of solo driver work for more than standard maximum work time – severe risk. |
Section/Act:
Orders:
|
|
21 April 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6791 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted at Marulan Heavy Vehicle Checking Station. The driver of the vehicle produced Work Diary records which showed he had worked 14 hours and 15 minutes in a 24-hour period which amounted to a critical risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months for the following:
|
|
21 April 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 4458 |
On 4 July 2022, a heavy vehicle was intercepted at the Marulan South heavy vehicle safety station. Upon inspection, authorised officers identified a severe mass breach. The assessed mass of the vehicle’s fourth axle group was 28.0 tonne when its allowable mass limit was 22.5 tonne, resulting in a severe mass breach or an overload of 124%. The driver of the vehicle stated that they did not load the vehicle and that they had gotten in at a rest stop. They stated that they were told the gauges installed on the trucks were broken and so they had not checked them. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
21 April 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5880 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted at the Marulan South heavy vehicle safety station. Upon inspection of the accused’s Work Diary, multiple fatigue offences were detected, namely nine critical fatigue breaches and one substantial fatigue breach. The driver advised that it was their first Work Diary and that they had asked other drivers to explain, but that they didn’t understand it. At court, the driver explained that they had significant reading and writing difficulties, is affected by mental illness and came from a low-socioeconomic background. The driver has since purchased an Electronic Work Diary subscription. Taking into account these circumstances, the court dealt with this driver in a very unique way. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
21 April 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 5454 |
On 28 September 2022, a heavy vehicle was intercepted at Marulan southbound heavy vehicle safety station. Upon investigation, it was found that the company failed to ensure that the vehicle complied with its dimension requirements. Namely, the vehicle exceeded its permitted width of 2500mm by 210mm. The driver advised that they hadn’t loaded the vehicle and that they hadn’t stopped to check the load. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): Training on mass, dimension and loading to all senior management and employees responsible for the operation of heavy vehicles. |
|
20 April 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 6267 |
On 16 August 2022, a vehicle registered to the Company failed to enter the heavy vehicle safety station situated near Twelve Mile Creek, New South Wales. On 26 October 2022, the Company failed to respond to a Notice to Produce requiring information in relation to the driver at the time of the failure to enter. The Company was charged with failing to respond to the Notice to Produce. The prosecution submitted that specific and general deterrence were relevant given the prevalence of this kind of offending. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
4 April 2023 Campbelltown Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6373 |
The accused was pulled over for an inspection by authorised officers. Upon inspection, authorised officers assessed the vehicle was not compliant with the Heavy Vehicle National Law as the height of the vehicle was 4.88 metres and the allowable height is 4.3 metres. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months for the following:
|
|
4 April 2023 Campbelltown Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6168 |
A driver was intercepted at Marulan by NHVR Authorised Officers and his Work Diary inspected. Between 6:00am on 31 October 2022 and 6:00am on 1 November 2022, the accused worked for a total of 14 hours, exceeding their standard work hours by 2 hours resulting in a critical risk breach. The accused stated they didn’t understand their Work Diary and calculated their hours a different way to the NHVR Authorised Officers. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months for the following:
|
|
3 April 2023 Moree Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5759 |
The defendant was charged with three counts of making a false/misleading entry in a work record. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months for the following:
|
|
29 March 2023 Liverpool Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5866 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted at Twelve Mile Creek by NHVR authorised officers. The authorised officers inspected the driver’s work diary and found two breaches of the HVNL. The driver worked 19 hours and rested 4.5 hours in a 24-hour period. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
28 March 2023 Wagga Wagga Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5510 |
A heavy vehicle carrying 3 caravans was intercepted by NHVR authorised officers. The authorised officers observed the vehicle travelling very slowly. Earlier in the journey the vehicle braked suddenly and the restraints on the rear caravan on the rear trailer failed, resulting in all webbing straps, except one, becoming loose. This caused the caravan to roll back and forward. The restraints on the front caravan of the rear trailer also failed. The contravention of the loading requirement resulted in a severe risk breach as there was an appreciable risk to public safety and an appreciable risk of damage to road infrastructure. The vehicle's permitted length was 26 metres. The vehicle's length was 26.65, an excess length of 0.65 meters. The contravention of the vehicle's permitted length resulted in a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months for the following:
|
|
28 March 2023 Fairfield Local Court Defendant type: Organisation - AS 5662 |
In September 2022, Safety and Compliance Officers inspected a white Table-Top truck in Yennora NSW. The driver advised officers that their employer had instructed them to drive the vehicle. The vehicle was over mass on the second axle group by 2 tonnes or 122%. The company was charged with a severe risk mass offence. Officers identified a minor risk breach on the vehicle’s gross mass but did not issue a penalty notice. The defendant voluntarily entered into a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO), the terms of which were relatively onerous. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
28 March 2023 Fairfield Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5402 |
A driver of a heavy vehicle was intercepted by NHVR Authorised Officers at Wetherill Park. Upon inspection of the driver's work diary, the compliance officers identified four breaches of the HVNL relating to fatigue. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
23 March 2023 Parkes Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5401 |
A solo driver rested for less than the standard minimum rest time - critical risk. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months for the following:
|
|
22 March 2023 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 6420 |
The defendant was charged with one count of permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass, a severe risk breach. | Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
21 March 2023 Forbes Local Court Accused type: Individual - AS 5882 |
On 20 October 2022, the offender was intercepted at Daroobalgie, NSW. Inspection of their National Work Diary revealed that in the 24-hour period between 9:30am on 19 October 2022 and 9:30am on 20 October 2022, the offender had driven 14 hours and 30 minutes. This exceeded their permitted hours by 2 hours and 30 minutes, resulting in a critical risk breach. The accused had a prior heavy vehicle record:
The NHVR made submissions on the need for specific and general deterrence as well as the matter of public safety. The NHVR applied for a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO). The offender was found guilty and sentenced by way of monetary order in the amount of $3,000 with costs awarded. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
16 March 2023 Penrith Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 5676 |
The corporate defendant was charged with two counts of permitting another person to drive a heavy vehicle that did not comply with mass requirements – severe risk. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
9 March 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 5215 |
The corporate defendant was charged with permitting a person to drive a heavy vehicle that does not comply with the relevant mass requirements applying to the vehicle- severe risk breach. | Section/Act:
Other orders:
12 months that requires:
|
|
9 March 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 5143 |
One count of permitting another person to drive a heavy vehicle that does not comply with mass requirements – severe risk. One count of permitting another person to drive a heavy vehicle that does not comply with mass requirements – severe risk – substantial risk. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months that requires:
|
|
7 March 2023 Downing Centre Local Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 4210 |
The accused company was the registered operator of the vehicle. In February 2022, an investigation commenced into the company for alleged fatigue management related breaches. The defendant voluntarily entered into a supervisory intervention order. The terms of which were relatively onerous and required them to hire staff to manage the paperwork. This indicates the company's willingness to rehabilitate and change their business practices. |
Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
6 March 2023 Queanbeyan Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 5520 |
The corporate defendant was charged with permitting a person to drive a heavy vehicle that does not comply with the relevant dimension requirements applying to the vehicle. | Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months for mass, dimension and loading training. |
|
1 March 2023 Tweed Heads Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5395 |
The accused was charged with one count of working more than standard hours (critical risk breach), and 2 counts of resting less than minimum hours (critical risk breach). In the 24-hour period between 11:00am on 8 September 2022 and 11:00am on 9 September 2022, the accused worked for 15 hours and 45 minutes. In the same 24-hour period, the accused rested for 5 continuous hours. In the 24-hour period from 9 September 2022 and 10 September 2022, the accused rested for 5 continuous hours. The accused had no prior heavy vehicle record. Plea of guilty was entered with explanation. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): Requiring training and purchase and use of an Electronic Work Diary (EWD). |
|
24 February 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5519 |
One count of a solo driver resting less than the standard minimum time – critical risk. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 Months with the following terms:
|
|
24 February 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5375 |
One count of a solo driver working more than the standard maximum time– critical risk. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
12 months with the following terms:
|
|
10 February 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5667 |
One count of driving, or permitting others to drive a heavy vehicle that does not comply with mass requirements - severe risk. The vehicle was weighed and assessed to have a mass of 8.32 tonnes on the steer axle. It was 128% over mass on that steer axle group, amounting to a critical risk breach. The director submitted that their company was responsible for the offence due to the Chain of Responsibility and their use of a novice driver. However, the director submitted the blame for the overloading of the vehicle should be shared between the driver and the third party which loaded the vehicle. The defendant company is ultimately responsible for the offence as the registered owner and operator, and has a responsibility to ensure the driver has adequate training and a procedure is in place to weigh vehicles after loading. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months in the following terms:
|
|
10 February 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5525 |
One count of a solo driver resting less than the standard minimum time – critical risk. The accused had driven a 7-day period (168-hour period) between 16 September 2022 at 8:45pm, and 23 September 2022 at 8:45pm. The accused did not have a 24-hour rest as required. Their longest rest in this period of time was 16 hours. The accused entered a plea of guilty and wrote a letter of apology to the court. The letter stated they were sorry and made a mistake. The Accused also consented to the Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO). The prosecutor submitted that the accused was a systematic offender and sought the imposition of an SIO. The accused had five similar offences in the past 8 years, mostly relating to fatigue and Work Diary offences. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
9 months imposing Fatigue Risk Management Training in addition to completing a Work Diary training. |
|
7 February 2023 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 4876 |
The defendant charged for driving 15 hours in a 24-hour period, when the maximum allowable work hours for them was 12 hours. The breach was discovered by authorised officers inspecting the defendant’s Work Diary during a routine inspection at a safety station. The charge was listed for a contested hearing. After discussions with the prosecutor, the defendant pleaded guilty on the morning of the hearing. At sentence, the NHVR submitted:
|
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months requiring the defendant to undertake training about how to complete a Work Diary. |
|
30 January 2023 Dubbo Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 5904 |
One count of permitting another person to drive a heavy vehicle that does not comply mass requirements. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other oders:
1-year in the following terms:
|
|
20 January 2023 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Operator - AS 5383 |
The accused was travelling from Austral, NSW to Goulburn, NSW. At the time of intercept, the accused had travelled approximately 135 kilometres or approximately 1 ½ hours. At the time of intercept, the accused had travelled approximately 82% of their journey. The vehicle's permitted mass on the second axle group was 9.00 tonnes. The vehicle's mass was weighed at 12.06 tonnes. Taking into account the applicable mass adjustment, the vehicle's alleged mass was 11.66 tonnes, an excess mass of 129%. When asked roadside by the Safety Compliance Officer whether or not they weighed the vehicle before commencing his journey, the accused said no. First offence under the HVNL. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
12 January 2023 |
A driver of a heavy vehicle worked 14 hours and 45 minutes in a 24-hour period. This is considered a critical fatigue breach, as the maximum hours that a driver of a heavy vehicle can work under the standard regime is 12 hours. | Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months for fatigue management training and use of an Electronic Work Diary (EWD). |
|
20 December 2022 Downing Centre Local Court Defendant type: Company - AS 5516 |
On 8 September 2022 compliance officers intercepted a white Freightliner primer travelling on Southern Cross Drive, Eastlakes NSW 2018. The accused company is the registered operator of the vehicle, which was loaded with steel/metal. The permitted width was 2.5 metres and measured at 2680mm (after allowing 20mm adjustment). Service was via process server who handed the 1st Court Attendance Notice to someone over 16 at the registered business address, the 2nd Court Attendance Notice was left at the same registered business address. A s196 application was made in the absence of the accused company. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
15 December 2022 Parramatta Local Court Defendant type: Individual |
A heavy vehicle was captured on Safe-T Cam not entering the Heavy Vehicle Safety Station on 2 separate incidents. Notices to Produce were sent to the defendant. The defendant did not respond to the Notices and did not provide a reasonable excuse. | Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
13 December 2022 Blacktown Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant – AS 4840 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass – severe risk breach – no prior prosecution history. The defendant was also charged with one count of using a heavy vehicle, not in a registered configuration. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
12 December 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The accused was charged with 1 count of working more than standard hours (critical risk breach) the work diary requirements. In the 24-hour period between 6:00 am on 22 June 2022 to 6:00 am on 23 June 2022, the accused recorded that they worked a total of 14 hours in the 24-hour period. Defendant found guilty with no conviction recorded. Defendant ordered to pay filing fees. SIO made requiring training and purchase and use of an Electronic Work Diary. |
Section/Act: Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months to undertake training provided includes training in respect of compliance with the fatigue requirements as relevant to fatigue-regulated heavy vehicles and use of an Electronic Work Diary. |
|
9 December 2022 Lithgow Local Court Defendant type: Operator |
The accused travelled approximately 670km with a heavy vehicle that only had the permitted length of 26m. The vehicle's length was measured at 28.15m. The heavy vehicle failed to comply with dimension requirements by exceeding them in excess length by 2.01m. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 6 months with the following conditions.
|
|
9 December 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The accused was charged with 1 count of working more than standard hours (critical risk breach) and 1 count of resting less than the minimal standard hours (critical risk breach). In the 24-hour period between 10:30 am on 7 July 2022 and 10:30 am on 8 July 2022, the accused recorded that they worked a total of 14 hours in the 24-hour period and rested for 4 hours and 45 minutes in the 24-hours period. The accused had no prior heavy vehicle record. A plea of guilty was entered with explanation. The accused explained they had misunderstood the work diary requirements. Defendant found guilty with no conviction recorded. |
Section/Act:
For 12-months to undertake training provided includes training in respect of compliance with the fatigue requirements as relevant to fatigue-regulated heavy vehicles and use of an Electronic Work Diary |
|
9 December 2022 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Company |
The accused was charged with 1 count permitting a heavy vehicle not to comply with the dimension requirements, resulting in a severe risk breach. On 12 September 2022, a heavy vehicle registered to the accused was inspected and found to be over-length. Dimension requirements required vehicle length to not exceed 26 meters. The length measured to be 26.97 meters, resulting in the vehicle being 0.97m over length. The accused was represented and submissions were made that a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) was not suitable because the accused’s record did not indicate they were, or would likely, become persistent offenders. The accused had two prior penalty infringement notices. The defence submitted that the steps the Company had since taken were enough to mitigate their offending (purchasing trailers rather than leasing). Submissions were made that the company had the benefit of PINs in the past and hadn’t rectified their conduct. Further submissions that the purpose of an SIO was to increase understanding, education and compliance and that due to the company being before the Court and the comments made in the interview, it was a suitable matter for an SIO. SIO made requiring training and equipment to improve compliance. |
Section/Act:
|
|
9 December 2022 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual |
On 3 September 2022, National Heavy Vehicle Regulator authorised officers observed a heavy vehicle, travelling North on the Hume Highway at Marulan NSW. The Accused drove the vehicle from Derrimut VIC to Wetherill Park NSW. A journey of 856kms. The vehicle was loaded with primary produce. In total, the load weighed approximately 49.75 tonnes. A visual inspection of the trailer found an open toolbox on the left side with unsecured steel bars protruding out and unsecured boards in the toolbox. The contravention of the loading requirement resulted in a severe risk breach. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
9 December 2022 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual |
On 20 August 2022 National Heavy Vehicle Regulator authorised officers observed a heavy vehicle travelling South on the Hume Highway at Marulan NSW. Upon inspection of the accused's work diary, the authorised officers identified 1 breach of the HVNL between 8 August 2022 and 9 August 2022, when the accused had worked 14.5 hours in any 24-hour period. On this occasion, the accused had undertaken a journey between Moorebank NSW and Gundagai NSW. The accused (solo driver) worked for more than the standard maximum work time of 12 hours. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
8 December 2022 Parkes Local Court |
The accused was charged with 1 count of make false or misleading entry in work record. The accused was working during a period he recorded in his work diary as rest. The STC in Albury detected the heavy vehicle at the time the accused recorded as rest. The defendant was legally represented and entered a plea of guilty. The legal representative made submissions to the effect that it was a genuine mistake, the defendant had done training since and was working closely with their employer to rectify their mistakes. The legal representative made submissions that if a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) was to be imposed requiring the defendant to purchase an Electronic Work Diary (EWD), that their employer would cease their employment. As such, the Regulator did not oppose the SIO being amended to remove the SIO’s requirement for an EWD and instead just require the defendant's written work diary pages. His Honour convicted the defendant, ordered a $2,000 fine and imposed the SIO. His Honour made comments regarding the employer’s attitude toward an EWD and expressed his displeasure, and that there was a need for the company to progress with the times and make changes to an EWD. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
7 December 2022 Gosford Local Court Defendant type: Individual defendant – AS 4398 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of making a false and misleading statement in a work diary. The accused had a poor traffic record in Queensland. Police charge the accused with the same offence 5 months later. Both matters before the court for sentence. The accused did not appear but indicated a plea of guilty by email to the court and indicated they were content to have the court deal with the matters in their absence. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 November 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The accused was charged with 1 count of working more than standard hours (critical risk breach) and 1 count of resting less than minimum hours (critical risk breach). In the 24-hour period between 13:30 on 13 June 2022 and 13:30 on 14 June 2022, the accused recorded that they worked a total of 19 hours and 15 minutes, and rested for a continuous period of 2 hours and 45 minutes. The accused had no prior heavy vehicle record. A plea of guilty was entered with explanation. It was their first trip. The accused was told, incorrectly, that they could drive a prime mover without a trailer and not have to have the 7 hours rest. The accused had not driven a heavy vehicle since the offence. They asked the prosecution if there was some training that they could undertake. The prosecutor applied for a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO). The defendant was found guilty with no conviction recorded, and placed under a Conditional Release Order (CRO) for 9 months. SIO made requiring training and purchase and use of an Electronic Work Diary (EWD). |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
25 November 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The defendant was charged with 1 x solo driver work more than maximum time, critical risk breach. In the relevant 24-hour period, the defendant drove 14 hours and 30 minutes. The defendant entered a written plea of guilty explaining that they misunderstood their work diary requirements. The defendant accepted responsibility. The defendant had no relevant prior history. The prosecutor applied for a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO). The defendant was found guilty with no conviction recorded and placed under a Conditional Release Order (CRO) for 9 months. An SIO was ordered by the Court requiring training, and the purchase and use of an Electronic Work Diary (EWD). |
Section/Act:
|
|
25 November 2022 Goulburn Local Court Accused type: Individual defendant - AS 4887 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of solo driver works more than standard maximum time (critical risk). Defendant had 2 previous Heavy vehicle offences
|
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 November 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The defendant was charged with 1 x solo driver work more than maximum standard hours (critical risk breach). In the relevant 24-hour period, he worked 13 hours and 30 minutes. This matter was originally dealt with by way of a fine. The defendant made an annulment application and entered a plea of guilty. The defendant was then unable to attend and requested the matter be dealt with in their absence. The Magistrate dealt with the matter in the accused absence. The prosecutor applied for a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) and the Magistrate agreed that the matter was appropriate for an SIO. He noted that the education provided and that an electronic work diary (EWD) would improve the compliance of the defendant in relation to their professional obligations. The defendant was found guilty with no conviction recorded, and placed under a conditional release order for 9 months. SIO made requiring training and purchase and use of an EWD. |
Section/Act:
|
|
21 November 2022 Katoomba Local Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 4285 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on Great Western Highway at Mount Boyce in NSW by NHVR Authorised Officers. The vehicle’s mass on the 3rd axle exceeded the mass limit by 146%. The assessed mass was measured at 29.2t and the mass limit was 20t. The driver stated that he was instructed and permitted to drive. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
21 November 2022 Katoomba Local Court Defendant type: Operator - AS 5180 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on Great Western Highway at Mount Boyce in NSW by NHVR Authorised Officers. The vehicle was loaded with two large pieces of machinery. The driver asserted they were travelling under the Multi-State Class 1 Load carrying Vehicle Mass Exemption Notice 2020 (No.1) whereby they could have carried 6.50 tonnes on the steer axle, 18.50 tonnes on the drive axle and 35.00 tonnes on the quad axle. However, as the vehicle was carrying two machines on the trailer, the vehicle was not eligible to run under the exemption and the general mass limits were applied. The court found that it was satisfied of the test set out in s600 of the HVNL and made a Supervisory Intervention Order for 6 months. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
11 November 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The accused was charged with one count of driver not complying with dimension requirements - severe risk. The accused was driving a heavy vehicle combination consisting of a prime mover towing a flatbed trailer. The flatbed trailer had two light vehicles loaded, and a further light vehicle was loaded on a frame fitted to the prime mover. The vehicle was measured at 21.46 meters, exceeding its permitted length of 19 metres. The accused attempted to rely on the New South Wales Class 1 Load Carrying Exemption Notice 2019 (No. 1). However, as the accused was not carrying an indivisible load, and they were not an eligible vehicle under the load and it did not apply. After some discussion, the accused plead guilty. The prosecution made an order under chapter 10 of the HVNL for a Commercial Benefits Penalty Order in the amount of $300. Her Honour afforded the offender the 25% discount for their early plea of guilty. Her Honour noted the maximum penalty. Her Honour expressed that it was a serious matter and that there was a clear commercial benefit. Her Honour ordered he pay a fine of $1,200, with costs and moiety awarded to the NHVR. Her Honour made the Commercial Benefits Penalty Order, noting her discretion to make an order of three times the amount. Her Honour made the order in the amount of $600. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
11 November 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The accused was charged with one count of solo driver work more than standard maximum time - critical risk. In the relevant 24-hour period, the accused had driven 14-hours, exceeding the permitted 12-hours by 2-hours. This resulted in a critical risk breach. The accused entered a plea of guilty with explanation and submitted on his personal circumstances, including his financial circumstances. The prosecution applied to make a Supervisory Intervention Order. The prosecution submitted that if the Court were minded to impose a fine as well as a Supervisory Intervention Order, it would not oppose the fine being reduced to reflect the costs associated with a Supervisory Intervention Order. Her Honour made the Supervisory Intervention Order. The Supervisory Intervention Order requires the accused to undertake training on his work diary requirements, and to purchase and use an Electronic Work Diary. |
Section/Act:
For 12-months for training for fatigue management and compliance with mass requirements. The accused must also use an Electronic Work Diary. |
|
27 October 2022 Parramatta Local Court Accused type: Company accused – AS 4650 |
The accused was charged with 1 count of failing to comply with an enforceable undertaking (EU). After the accused was charged with a severe over-mass offence that occurred on 12 August 2020, the accused entered into an EU with the NHVR on 7 May 2021. Subsequently, on 24 June 2021, the charge against the accused was withdrawn. The EU required the accused to undertake 3 activities within 12 months of entering into the EU but, despite extensions being granted, the EU was not complied with. The accused pleaded guilty to the charge and submitted that the company was nearly bankrupt, no longer had staff and was selling assets to pay off debts. The Magistrate stated it was a significant offence undertakings need to be taken seriously when they are entered as an alternative to court proceedings. |
Section/Act:
Penalty
Other orders:
|
|
26 October 2022 |
The defendant operated a heavy vehicle loaded with a variety of items including heavy pallets and truck axles. The defendant pleaded guilty to not complying with dimension requirements – severe risk; and not complying with loading requirements – severe risk. The vehicle’s load shifted due to poor positioning and application of load restraint devices. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of six (6) months from the date that the Order is made with the following terms:
|
|
7 October 2022 Goulburn Local Court |
The accused was charged with 1 count of obstructing an authorised officer etc exercising power under law. On 27 June 2022, the accused was directed to enter the Heavy Vehicle Safety Station at Marulan. The Regulator’s authorised officers commenced exercising the power to inspect the heavy vehicle and to inspect the work diary. Her Honour convicted the accused and agreed the officers were obstructed not only from exercising the power, but from providing education to the accused. She noted that there was a strong need for general deterrence due to the risk to safety. Her Honour agreed there was an extensive history and that there was evidently a positive disregard by the accused of his professional obligations and of public safety. She agreed there was a concern that, without imposing a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO), there was a risk for further offending. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
7 October 2022 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual – AS 4796 |
The accused was charged with 1 count of working more than standard hours (critical risk breach) and 1 count of resting less than minimum hours (critical risk breach). In the 24-hour period between 13:30 on 13 June 2022 and 13:30 on 14 June 2022, the accused recorded that he worked a total of 19 hours and 15 minutes, and rested for a continuous period of 2 hours and 45 minutes. Her Honour agreed the offences were made out and proceeded to sentence. Before doing so, Her Honour commented “I don’t think I’ve ever seen that many hours of work in a 24-hour period before.” The accused had no prior heavy vehicle record. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
30 September 2022 |
Officers at Mount White HVSS intercepted and inspected a Tipper and Dog trailer combination. The defendant was charged with 3 counts of permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass severe risk breach. Charge 1 relates to Gross mass. Charges 2 and 3 relate to axle groups 2 and 4 of the same vehicle, respectively. No prior history. Evidence was tendered that the company is relatively small, and financially fragile. Evidence provided by defendant that company had counselled the driver and provided additional training. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
30 September 2022 Penrith District Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant – AS 5326; 4265 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass – SEVERE risk breach. One prior conviction for a severe over mass offence. Three PIN’s issued for similar minor category over mass offence. One of the PINS was for an offence that post-dated this offence. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
28 September 2022 |
The Accused was charged with solo driver rest for less than standard minimum rest time - critical risk. Defendant’s fifth heavy vehicle offence in 8 years. On this basis the matter proceeded by way of s.196. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of six (6) months;
|
|
9 September 2022 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Individual defendant – AS 4263 |
The Accused was charged with the following offences:
The Accused had a record of similar offences. The Accused was represented by a legal practitioner in Court. Upon the plea of guilty, the NHVR tendered written submissions and proposed order in an application by consent for a Supervisory Intervention Order. The application was granted. The presiding Magistrate noted that the offences, coupled with the Accused antecedence were serious, and that the installation of an electronic work diary would foster safe practices by the Accused. |
Section/Act:
Penalty:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For 12 months in the following terms:
|
|
9 September 2022 Goulburn Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant – AS 5085 |
The corporate Accused was charged with one count of ‘permit other to drive heavy vehicle not comply mass requirements - severe risk’ contrary to s 96(1)(c) of the HVNL. The Accused had an extensive enforcement and prosecution history. The Accused was represented by a legal practitioner in Court. Upon the plea of guilty, the NHVR tendered written submissions and a proposed order in an application by consent for a Supervisory Intervention Order. The application was granted. The presiding Magistrate noted that the offence was serious, and that the objective of the HVNL is to promote safe business practices. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For 6 months in the following terms:
|
|
1 September 2022 Penrith Local Court Defendant type: Individual |
The defendant was charged with a critical risk breach of working more than the allowed hours under BFM accreditation. The defendant pleaded guilty to this charge in Penrith Local Court on 1 September 2022. This was the third offence of the same kind for the defendant. The NHVR applied to the Court for a Supervisory Intervention Order on this basis. The defendant was represented by a barrister who confirmed that the Supervisory Intervention Order was consented to but asked the Court to take it into consideration as a reason for not proceeding to a conviction. The presiding Magistrate noted the defendant’s history and noted that the offending was not “trivial” and commented on the risk that a fatigued driver had on themselves, other road users, and the community. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order, (SIO):
|
| 25 August 2022 Lithgow Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 4510 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass – severe risk breach – the seventh offence of this nature in 2 years. The heavy vehicle was intercepted on 27 May 2022 by TfNSW On Road Officers. It was weighed and was found to be over mass. The second axle weighed 19.9 tonnes with the allowable mass limit being 16.5. This was a SEVERE risk breach and was 120.6% of the permissible weight for the heavy vehicle. The heavy vehicle was loaded with blocks of sandstone and was travelling from Mount Druitt to Hartley NSW through the Blue Mountains. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
|
24 August 2022 Windsor Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 4340 |
The defendant company was charged with permitting a person to drive a heavy vehicle that does not comply with the relevant mass requirements applying to the vehicle. On 8 June 2022, the defendant’s vehicle was intercepted and found to be in breach of the relevant mass requirements on its rear axle group (severe risk breach - overload of 120.3%). The vehicle was also found to be in breach of its gross mass (substantial risk) and its fourth axle group (minor breach). Two vehicle defect notices were also issued. The defendant had been convicted of 10 previous mass related offences between 2015 and 2021. The defendant entered a plea of guilty. The prosecutor noted that this offence was at the mid-range of objective seriousness, noted the defendant’s record and applied for a Supervisory Intervention Order. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
23 August 2022 Downing Centre Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant - AS 4588 |
The corporate defendant was charged with one count of failure to provide information required by authorised officer. The maximum penalty for this offence is $34,550. The corporate defendant had no prior prosecution history. The corporate defendant did not appear in Court on this occasion. The NHVR applied to the Court to have the charges dealt with in its absence. The Application was granted, and the corporate defendant was convicted and sentenced. The presiding Magistrate noted that the offence was serious, and that the objective of the HVNL is to promote productive and efficient business practices. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
11 August 2022 Penrith Local Court Defendant: Self represented - AS 4623 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of working more than the standard hours – CRITICAL risk breach – fourth offence in the last 6 years. On 6 April 2022, a heavy vehicle prime mover failed to enter the weighbridge as directed. A Notice to Produce was sent to the registered operator of the vehicle to ascertain the personal details of the driver and obtain work diary records. On 30 May 2022, the registered operator responded to the Notice to Produce. An examination of the work diary records indicated that the driver worked 14.5 hours work in a 24 hour period, which is 2.5 hours more than the maximum standard hours. This is considered a critical breach in accordance to schedule 1 of the Heavy Vehicle (Fatigue Management) National Regulation (NSW) 2013. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders: Convictions recorded Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): This Order operates for a period of six (6) months.
|
|
8 August 2022 Finley Local Court Defendant type: Individual defendant - AS 4565 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of solo driver rest less than standard minimum time – critical risk. The defendant had one prior relevant offence of making a false or misleading entry in a work record. |
Section/Act:
Penalty:
Other orders:
|
|
8 August 2022 Penrith Local Court Defendant: Corporate defendant – AS 4265 |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of permitting a heavy vehicle to be driven while over mass – SEVERE risk breach – second offence of this nature in 6 years. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 June 2021 Downing Centre Local Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant |
Permit another person to drive a heavy vehicle not complying with mass requirement – severe risk breach. The vehicle's permitted mass on the first axle was 6 tonnes. On this occasion, the mass of the first axle was assessed at 7.25 tonnes; being a 20.8% overload. NHVR submissions: The overload, combined with defective brakes and tyres, presented a real safety risk to community. The lack of driver training elevated the objective seriousness of the offending. Defendant’s submissions: They are a small company. They are remorseful and had taken steps to correct the issues evidenced by the driver handbook (tendered). Issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic meant training was not at the forefront of their consideration at the time. A forklift was used to make the corrections so weight was evenly distributed over the axles. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
22 July 2020 Corowa Local Court Defendant: Driver |
The defendant was charged with two counts of making false or misleading entries in work record. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
20 July 2020 Downing Centre Local Court Defendant: Company |
The defendant was charged with a Severe category over mass offence. The vehicle was overloaded by 25% on the tri-axle and the defendant had two prior convictions for similar matter in 2018 and 2019.
It was noted that while the maximum penalty had the defendant been an individual was $14,000.00 as it was a Corporation, the Court was entitled to impose a max fine of around $70,000.00, pursuant to s596 of the HVNL. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
15 July 2020 Forster Local Court Defendant: Company |
A Kenworth B-Double combination was directed to stop at the Jones Island Heavy Vehicle Checking Station on 19th February 2020. Tests were carried out and it was found that the speed limiter was set to 125.5 km/h – more than 25 per cent above the allowed threshold. The matter was heard in Forster Local Court on 15 July. The prosecution submitted that the offence was at the higher end of seriousness, as the company’s truck was able to travel at more than 25 per cent above the maximum speed limit, creating a real risk to public safety. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
Queensland
| Court details | Offence | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
|
18 January 2022 Toowoomba Magistrates Court Matter of e, AJ |
On 22 July 2021, Transport inspectors intercepted a Hino rigid truck on the Cunningham Highway east of Goondiwindi. The defendant presented his work diary for inspection, and was operating under standard hours. Facts in relation to Charge 1 The defendant's records revealed that in the preceding 24-hour period, the defendant had worked a total of 16 ½ hours. This constituted a critical risk breach. Facts in relation to Charge 2 The defendant's records also showed that in the preceding 24-hour period, the defendant had only completed a period of three continuous hours rest. This also constituted a critical risk breach. When questioned regarding the content of his work diary, the defendant stated that he does not drive heavy vehicles often, and was unsure of the total amount of time that he was allowed to work or rest during a 24-hour period. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
15 September 2021 Maryborough Matter of W R L |
On 4 April 2021, Transport Inspectors intercepted the defendant driving a heavy vehicle combination travelling northbound on the Bruce Highway, at the Maryborough weigh site. Upon request, the defendant presented his work diary. The defendant was operating under Basic Fatigue Management hours as a solo driver. An inspection of the work diary revealed four instances where the defendant had exceeded permissible work hours: Facts in relation to Charge 1 The defendant had worked a total of 16 hrs in the 24hr period commencing at Townsville at 6pm on 8 February 2021 and ending at Yatala at 6pm on 9 February 2021, constituting a critical risk breach. Facts in relation to Charge 2 The defendant had worked a total of 16 hrs in the 24hr period commencing at Mackay at 10pm on 6 March 2021 and ending at Gin Gin at 10pm on 7 March 2021, constituting a critical risk breach. Facts in relation to Charge 3 The defendant had worked a total of 15 ¾ hrs in the 24hr period commencing at Yatala at 8:30pm on 17 March 2021 and ending between Bowen and Mount Saint John at 8:30pm on 18 March 2021, constituting a critical risk breach. Facts in relation to Charge 4 The driver had worked a total of 16 hrs in the 24hr period commencing at Yatala at 3pm on 27 March 2021 and ending |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
14 July 2021 Townsville Magistrates Court Matter of Cr |
On 24 September 2020, Transport Inspectors intercepted a heavy combination carrying a 46-tonne excavator on the Flinders Highway, which was directed to the Woodstock mobile weigh site. When questioned about mass permits, the defendant produced a copy of the NHVR Notice – Multi-State Class 1 Load Carrying Vehicle Mass Exemption Notice 2019. This 2019 Mass Exemption Notice had been rescinded by the equivalent 2020 Mass Exemption Notice in May 2020, however, would not apply in any event as the exemption notice only applied to the combination if the quad-axle group did not exceed 35 tonnes. The assessed mass of 36.8 tonnes was 184% of the mass requirement. Therefore, the State Class 1 Load Carrying Vehicle Mass Exemption Notice 2020 to ceased operation, and the regulation mass limit applied, equating to a severe breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
7 August 2020 Wynnum Magistrates Court Defendant: Company |
The defendant company was investigated as a result of a tip off through the Heavy Vehicle Confidential Reporting Line. The investigation revealed that the two main drivers for the company had committed a number of fatigue management offences driving between Wagga Wagga and Brisbane. The company breached its duty in the chain of responsibility as it failed to schedule trips in a way that enabled the drivers to comply with the HVNL. The company was fined and has since changed their practices, which allows its drivers to rest adequately during travel periods. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
7 August 2020 Wynnum Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
In November 2018 the defendant was employed to drive a B-double from Brisbane to Wagga Wagga to collect canola oil and return to the Port of Brisbane with the consignment. The defendant held Basic Fatigue Management accreditation and was authorised to drive for 14 hours a day, yet still had to have 7 continuous hours of rest. The driver falsified his work diary (s702(1)) to attempt to cover the fact that he was completing up to 20 hours of work in a single 24-hour period. In one instance he had as little as 1 ¾ hours of continuous rest. The company the driver was employed by was also successfully prosecuted under the HVNL Primary Duty legislation. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
7 August 2020 Wynnum Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
The defendant did not hold any accreditation which meant that he could drive for 12 hours a day, and was required to have at least 7 continuous hours of rest. The driver falsified his work diary to attempt to cover the fact that he could not, even theoretically, travel from Brisbane to Wagga Wagga in one day, even though the Company expected him to do so. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
2 April 2020 Proserpine Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
The defendant was intercepted on the Bruce Highway. There were discrepancies between his work diary and ANPR camera data. An investigation commenced and using GPS data and ANPR data it was determined that the driver had undertaken extensive falsification of his work diary. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
13 May 2019 Southport Magistrates Court Defendant: Director |
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. |
Section/Act:
(Pre 01/10/2018 offences) Fine:
|
|
26 April 2019 Townsville Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
15 April 2019 Cleveland Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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). |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
13 December 2018 Toowoomba Magistrates Court Defendant: Company |
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). |
Section/Act:
(Pre 01/10/2018 offence) October 18) Fine:
|
South Australia
| Court details | Offence | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
|
15 February 2024 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 3463 |
The defendant recorded on a work diary page that he was resting at a time when the vehicle he was driving was detected driving by Safe-T-Cam. The defendant contested the matter and it went to trial. The prosecution led the case that the Safe-T-Cam photograph established that the defendant was driving the vehicle when he recorded he was resting in his work diary. The defendant was unable to offer a defence and the magistrate found that the prosecution had proved the charge. |
Section/Act
Outcome
Fine
|
|
27 November 2023 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 4228 |
The defendant was intercepted by South Australian police in 2021. Further investigations were undertaken by the NHVR which detected multiple critical fatigue offences over the course of a period of six months. Following negotiations between NHVR prosecutions, and the defendant’s solicitor, the defendant plead guilty to all five offences and voluntarily entered into a Supervisory Intervention Order (“SIO”) which requires them to report their work activity to the NHVR for a period of 6 months. Convictions were recorded on all five counts. The magistrate also imposed a significant financial penalty exceeding $10,000 but suspended part of that penalty upon the defendant entering into the SIO. If the defendant fails to comply with the terms of the SIO, they will be liable for the full penalty. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of 6 months with the following conditions:
|
|
9 October 2023 Murray Bridge Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - AS 5781 |
The defendant was driving when Authorised Officers intercepted the heavy vehicle. Upon inspection, Authorised Officers detected multiple defects and issued Defect Notices to repair the heavy vehicle, and prohibiting the defendant to drive the heavy vehicle. The defendant failed to comply with a prohibition notice not to drive a defected heavy vehicle. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
9 October 2023 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5558 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers for a compliance check. Authorised Officers asked to for the driver’s Work Diary, which the driver did not have. Authorised Officers searched the vehicle and located the driver’s Work Diary and also discovered supplementary records. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
29 September 2023 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5001 |
Authorised Officers intercepted a heavy vehicle for a compliance check on the Princes Highway, Tailem Bend South Australia. The Accused produced his Work Diary to the Authorised Officers for inspection. Upon inspection, the Authorised Officers three fatigue related offences, and two false and misleading offences. |
Section/Act:
Outcome:
Fine:
|
|
10 July 2023 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 4780 |
The defendant breached the HVNL on eleven occasion by making false or misleading entries in a Work Diary. The defendant recorded that they were resting when they were working. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
23 June 2023 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 6502 |
The offender was operating under an Advanced Fatigue Management (AFM) accreditation which specifies in the certificate of accreditation stated that:
Upon inspection of the offender’s Work Diary, authorised officers identified a breach between 3 September 2022 and 4 September 2022, when the offender had failed to comply with the AFM rest requirements. In the 24-hour period, the offender only rested for 4 continuous hours and a total rest time of 8 hours. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
23 June 2023 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - AS 4016 |
The defendant was intercepted by South Australian Police officers in February 2022. The defendant was aggressive to the officers and the officers undertook a full review of the defendant’s Work Diary, which revealed three false or misleading entries. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
30 May 2023 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - AS 3859 |
The defendant was intercepted by South Australia police in January 2022. Comparing the defendant’s Work Diary entries against Safe-T-Cam photographs, 10 separate offences were detected for false or misleading entries in the defendant’s Work Diary. The defendant was convicted on all counts. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
26 May 2023 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - AS 4621, 4775 |
The defendant was intercepted by South Australia police in June 2022, at which time they denied that they had their Work Diary with them. This constituted the basis of the accused’s offending for failing to comply with a direction to produce a Work Diary, and also making a false or misleading statement to an authorised official. Upon discovery of the accused's Work Diary in the vehicle, police officers identified Work Diary offences comprising the defendant’s failure to record work activity. In addition to this, an NHVR Safe-T-Cam detected further offending which resulted in two charges of making false or misleading entries in a work diary. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
28 April 2023 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 3766 |
A drivers National Driver Work Diary was inspected following two routine intercepts and Safe-T-Cam incident detections. These inspections of the work diary revealed two counts of false and misleading entries, and nine counts of working over the maximum hours and resting less than the minimum standard hours. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
17 April 2023 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 4116 |
The accused was stopped and pulled over by authorised officers. The accused’s Work Diary was inspected. Upon inspection, it was detected that the accused had five false and misleading entries in their Work Diary. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
12 April 2023 Murray Bridge Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 3673 |
The defendant was driving a heavy vehicle which was intercepted by Authorised Officers whom inspected the vehicle, spoke to the accused and inspected the accused’s work diary. Officers detected three false and misleading offences. On one of the accused’s work diary pages, the accused claimed to have travelled between Moree and Bellata – a distance of 51 kilometres – in only 15 minutes. Their Honour stated the defendant had been driving trucks a long time and should know better – they know they have to complete a National Work Diary and they know there is a requirement for it to be accurate. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
30 March 2023 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 3741 |
17 October 2021, South Australia Police Heavy Vehicle Enforcement Unit officers Mercedes Prime Mover on the Eyre Highway at Kyancutta. The combination had a Gross Vehicle Mass of 12 tonnes, which meant it was a fatigue-related heavy vehicle for the purposes of the Heavy Vehicle National Law Count 1: Recorded working 16 hours in 24 hours – this is 2 hours over the allowed maximum. Count 2: Recorded working 16 hours in 24 hours – 2 hours over the allowed maximum. Count 3: Recorded working 16 hours in 24 hours – this is 2 hours over the allowed maximum. The accused acknowledged their mistake and accepted that they were being reported for the three offences. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of 12 months with the following conditions:
|
|
23 February 2023 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - AS 4226 |
Upon being intercepted while driving, the defendant was requested to produce their Work Diary to officers. They refused to do so, stating that they had lost the diary. They then provided inaccurate supplementary Work Diary sheets to the officers. Upon searching the cabin, the officers located their Work Diary. The defendant was subsequently charged with making a false statement, providing false documents, and also failing to comply with a direction issued by officers. The defendant had a significant history of heavy vehicle related offending involving providing false or misleading information to officials, failing to record work activity, failure to comply with lawful directions and exceeding allowable work hours. An application was made to the court to impose a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) on the defendant based on their ongoing, persistent offending. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): Imposed requiring the defendant to obtain an Electronic Work Diary (EWD) and submit their work records on a monthly basis for a period of 6 months to the NHVR for monitoring and compliance. |
|
20 February 2023 Ceduna Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - AS 3982, AS 4781 |
On 18 December 2021 and 3 July 2022, the defendant drove a fatigue-regulated heavy vehicle, and South Australian Police officers intercepted the vehicle for compliance checks. Police checked the defendant's Work Diary against the Safe-T-Camera sightings of the recorded vehicle. They detected eight instances of false or misleading entries. |
Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of 12 months the driver is to use an Electronic Work Diary to monitor and record their work and rest times when required to record their work and rest times as per the Heavy Vehicle National Law and Regulations. |
|
14 February 2023 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - AS 4638 |
On 1 March 2022, the defendant drove a fatigue-regulated heavy vehicle and Safety Compliance Officers (SCOs) intercepted it for compliance checks. The defendant told the SCOs that they had to falsify their Work Diary to ensure they would return to their work base on time. An investigation of their Work Diary pages revealed five false or misleading entries, but they did not overwork except for one minor breach. The defendant submitted in mitigation that they were not trying to mislead, as they genuinely misunderstood the Work Diary requirements. They were remorseful and agreed to a fine and Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO). |
Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): The defendant must, at their own expense, engage an accredited training provider to undertake training with them in respect of the requirements of the HVNL concerning National Driver Work Diaries. |
|
20 January 2023 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 3582 |
A heavy vehicle in combination with a pig trailer was intercepted by NHVR Authorised Officers while travelling northbound on Port Wakefield Road, Globe Derby. The heavy vehicle combination exceeded the applicable mass dimension requirements. The heavy vehicle was loaded at 127% capacity and the pig trailer loaded at 117% capacity. | Section/Act:
|
|
12 December 2022 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted on 12 February 2022 in Stirling North for a compliance check by South Australian Police. Inspection of the driver’s work diary revealed that between 7 February 2022 and 12 February 2022 the driver had made false or misleading entries in his work diary on 4 separate days. |
Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
12 December 2022 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted in Ulcota for compliance checks. Inspection of the driver’s National Driver Work Diary disclosed 4 separate instances of false or misleading entries being recorded. The offending was detected by comparison to fuel records and the time required to travel between recorded locations. |
Section/Act:
|
|
12 December 2022 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver |
The defendant was charged with two counts of exceeding their allowable work hours, one count of making false or misleading entries in their work diary and one count of driving whilst fatigued. | Section/Act:
|
|
12 December 2022 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted in Ulcota for compliance checks. Inspection of the driver’s National Driver Work Diary disclosed 4 separate instances of false or misleading entries being recorded. The offending was detected by comparison to fuel records and the time required to travel between recorded locations. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
| 28 October 2022 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
Between 25 October 2021 and 13 December 2021, the accused made seven false or misleading entries in his National Driver Work Diary. Additionally, on 20 February 2022, the accused exceeded their standard work hours and worked for 14 hours in a 24-hour period. (CRITICAL risk breach). |
Section/Act:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months from date of order:
|
|
23 August 2023 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Corporate - AS 3897, AS 2704 |
Count 1: The driver advised that his boss had instructed them to drive. Count 2: The driver advised that his boss had instructed them to drive. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
8 August 2022 Ceduna Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
Between 10 August 2021 and 14 August 2021 the individual made five (5) false or misleading entries in his National Driver Work Diary. Additionally, between 13 August and 14 August 2021 the individual exceeded their AFM work hours and had worked for 18 hours in a 24 hour period (critical risk breach). |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
24 June 2022 Defendant type: Operator - AS: 3551 |
The defendant plead guilty to 8 counts of making false or misleading entries in their work diary between 9 September and 8 October 2020 and 1 count of exceeding their allowable work hours on 2 October 2020. | Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
12 May 2022 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Corporate defendant |
The defendant was charged with one count of contravening a mass or dimension exemption and one count of contravening a class 2 Heavy Vehicle authorisation. “On 25 May 2020 a heavy vehicle comprising a prime mover towing three trailers with over dimension loads travelled through Port Augusta. The company had permitted the driver to drive the vehicle at night, breaching the exemption that it could only be driven during daylight hours and also failed to ensure that all relevant regulatory inspection labels were clearly displayed." |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
12 May 2022 Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant type: Operator - Permit contravene notices |
The defendant was charged with two counts of permitting a driver to contravene exemption notices. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 March 2022 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - Fatigue |
Following a SAPOL investigation the accused was charged with 9 counts of making false or misleading entries in a work record. The majority breaches involved the accused being detected travelling through Safe-T-Camera during periods claimed as rest. Prosecutors emphasised the seriousness of the offending, and its impact on being able to accurately determine of the work and rest patterns of the accused. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
24 March 2022 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant type: Operator primary duties |
The defendant was charged with: 2 x Failing to comply with a duty which exposed a person to a risk of death or serious injury; and 1 x Failing to comply with a duty. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
18 February 2022 Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - False or misleading statements |
The defendant was charged with six counts of recording false or misleading entries in his work diary over a period of about two weeks. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
19 September 2021 Ceduna Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver - Fatigue |
The defendant was charged with 3 counts of critical risk breach of over hours. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
2 August 2021 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver |
Defendant charged with one count of obstructing an authorised officer who was exercising a power under the HVNL. Matter proceeded in absence of defendant. Submissions made as the seriousness of the offending and importance of ensuring safety of Safety and Compliance Officers. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
2 August 2021 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver |
Following an intercept by South Australian Police, the driver’s Work Diary entries were compared with Safe-T-Camera sighting of his vehicle. They were subsequently charged with two counts of making false or misleading entries in a work record. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
2 August 2021 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver |
The Defendant was charged with two counts of failing to comply with the maximum work time for a solo drover operating under standard hours and one count of making a false or misleading entry in his work diary. This was one of two matters the Defendant had before the Court on this day. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
2 August 2021 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant type: Driver |
The Defendant was charged as a solo driver operating under standard hours of three counts of working for more than the maximum work time. Two critical risk breaches and one minor risk breach. This Defendant plead guilty in writing to all offences. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
14 July 2021 Berri Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver - Fatigue |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of critical risk breach of over hours and one severe risk breach of over hours. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
14 July 2021 Berri Magistrates Court Defendant: Operator |
A vehicle was observed travelling in Yamba. It was diagnostically tested. It was revealed that the engine control module/emission control system was tampered with through reprogramming. This resulted in a non-compliant emission control system. Specifically, the design rules and standards were not being complied with for the heavy vehicle. As a result of the inspection, a further 3 heavy vehicles belonging to the Defendant were inspected. It was also revealed that the engine control module/emission control system had been tampered with for these heavy vehicles. All 4 heavy vehicles were issued with major defect notices. The Defendant paid approximately $32,594 to qualified mechanics to rectify the major defects. This was to ensure the vehicles had compliant emission control systems. The Defendant had no relevant prior convictions. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 June 2021 Mount Gambier Magistrates Court Defendant type: Employee - Managing Director |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of having in his possession a device that is designed, or is adapted, to enable tampering with a speed limiter of a heavy vehicle; first time offender. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 June 2021 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of critical risk breach of over hours, one severe risk breach of over hours and 1 count of false or misleading entries; first time offender. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other Orders:
|
|
30 November 2020 Ceduna Magistrates Court Defendant: Employee driver |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of critical risk breach of over hours; first time offender. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
30 November 2020 Ceduna Magistrates Court Defendant: Employee driver |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of false or misleading entries, 1 count of severe risk breach of over hours and 1 count of critical risk breach of insufficient rest; first time offender. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
27 November 2020 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Party in COR: Driver |
A driver was charged with seven counts of entering false or misleading information into his Work Diary over the period of about one month. He had regularly recorded that he was resting at a particular location in the Barossa Valley when he was undertaking work activity. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 September 2020 Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant: Employee driver |
The defendant was charged with one count of not having a 24 hour continuous stationary rest in a 7 day period and one count of making false or misleading entry in work diary; one previous relevant offence of making false or misleading entry in work diary. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
Elizabeth Magistrates Court Defendant: Employee driver |
The defendant was charged with four counts of working over hours in a 24 hour period; first time offender. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
6 July 2020 Port Augusta Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
The defendant was charged with multiple fatigue breaches. He plead guilty to all charges. Magistrate imposed a global penalty of $7,500 for 5 CRITICAL and 1 SUBSTANTIAL breach charges. It was noted the defendant would likely lose his licence as potentially over 20 demerit points would have automatically attached to the convictions. The defendant applied to have these demerit points reduced. The Magistrate agreed to this, noting that such a reduction can only occur in unusual circumstances and any decision to reduce demerit points must relate to the course of the offending itself, NOT to the personal circumstances of the defendant. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
13 May 2020 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
The defendant was charged with 5 counts of making false or misleading entries 325 HVNL and a count of provide false document 702 HVNL. The defendant had a number of prior convictions, three of which were similar to the conduct charged. The Prosecution submitted that an order of the court modifying his MC licence by precluding the driver driving a HV outside of 100km of his driver’s base will ensure he does not hold a duty of accurately filling out a work diary, thus avoiding further offending. Balancing that, he can still be gainfully employed working as a HV driver within the 100km for local freight. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
27 May 2019 Port Pirie Magistrates Court Defendant: Company |
An SA based company was transporting a tractor excavator combination on the back of a low loader trailer in a manner that did not comply with the Load Restraint Guide. The load was observed shifting and moving forward on the deck of the low loader as the vehicle braked. The company was charged with a permit offence in accordance with s 111 HVNL and it was a severe risk breach in accordance with s 114. The company pleaded guilty at the first possible opportunity and was given a 40% discount for their early guilty plea. The company was fined $10,000.00 plus fees and levy. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
5 March 2019 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
5 March 2019 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
5 March 2019 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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.
|
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
5 March 2019 Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
30 January 2019 Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
30 January 2019 Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Operator |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
3 December 2018 Ceduna Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
14 November 2018 Port Adelaide Magistrates Court Defendant: Company/owner |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
4 September 2018 Ceduna Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
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. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
Tasmania
| Court details | Offence | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
|
4 May 2023 Launceston Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company- AS 2940 |
The Company failed to take reasonably practicable steps as an employer in the Chain of Responsibility (CoR). The failure of the Company to take reasonably practical steps, as mandated by the HVNL, resulted in a culture of continued and systemic breaches of the Regulations and was in breach of the safety duties imposed by the HVNL. This failure exposed two classes of individuals, namely the employed drivers of the company, and the public, to a risk of death or serious injury. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12 months with conditions to receive training in the following units:
|
|
4 May 2023 Launceston Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 3295 |
The offender failed to take reasonably practicable steps as a scheduler in the Chain of Responsibility (CoR). The offender also failed to take reasonably practicable steps, as an executive of a company of which they were the sole director, to exercise due diligence to ensure the company complied with its safety duty. The lack of proactive management by the offender of their transport activities, as mandated by the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL), resulted in a culture of continued and systemic breaches of the Regulations and was in breach of the safety duties imposed by the HVNL. This failure exposed two classes of individuals, namely the employed drivers of the company, and the public, to a risk of death or serious injury. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): 12-months with conditions to receive training in the following units:
|
|
25 January 2022 Burnie Magistrates Court Defendant type: Operator - AS 2957 |
The accused was charged with 1x s. 96(1)(c) – Fail to comply with mass requirement – severe risk breach. On 4 March 2021, the accused was driving a prime mover and quad axle low loader on the Bass Highway. It was loaded with a crusher. The vehicle was weighed at the Howth weighbridge for inspection. The rear quad-axle group was weighed and the alleged mass was 36,600kg. The alleged mass breached the Tasmania Class 1 Load Carrying Vehicles mass and dimension Exemption Notice 2017 (No 1). The Exemption Notice did not apply as the mass limits were breached on the notice. Therefore, the permitted mass was the statutory limit of 20,000kg. The alleged breach was an excess mass of 16,600kg which is 183% of the prescribed mass limit. The accused entered a guilty plea. The accused was legally represented. The accused was cooperative with the officers during the intercept. The accused had a prior history of traffic infringement notices including for a mass offence in 2014 and an overhang offence in 2006. The presiding Magistrate made remarks that a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) was an appropriate sentence disposition in this matter. It supports rehabilitation and community protection. The Order as sought by Prosecutor was imposed. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other Orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): The accused must complete a training course as provided by a course provider, chain of responsibility expert or industry expert within twelve (12) months. The training is to be on the following:
|
|
3 November 2021 Launceston Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company |
The corporation was a transportation operator involved in carting of loads. A DAF prime mover was intercepted, which was a fatigue regulated heavy vehicle. The National Work Diary of an employed driver revealed that the driver was working more than the standard work hours. There was a total of three breaches identified. The breaches are categorised as follows between 24 November 2020 to 2 December 2020:
The Defendant was charged with a prohibited request under section 26E of the Heavy Vehicle National Law. The Defendant failed to ensure the employed driver did not commence driving tasks earlier. The Defendant did not make enquiries as to when the employed driver commenced driving or the number of hours worked on the respective dates. The Defendant allocated the employed driver tasks which had the effect of causing the employed driver to drive more than the permitted 12 hours in any 24 hour period, which resulted in the driver breaching their standard work rest hours option. The Defendant indirectly caused the employed driver to be in breach of their work rest hours option. The Defendant had no prior convictions. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO):
|
|
17 November 2021 Burnie Magistrates Court Defendant: Operator |
The Defendant was an operator of a partnership. The Defendant's role included but was not limited to managing the partnerships transport activities and maintaining heavy vehicles. 49 heavy vehicles were registered and operated by the Defendant. The Defendant failed to implement adequate systems for inspection, fault finding, recording, maintenance and repairs of its heavy vehicles. Between 13 March 2019 to 19 November 2019, the Defendant was issued with 46 defect notices (4 major and 42 minor) as well as 2 infringement notices. Maintenance records kept by the Defendant revealed the frequency for inspection of the heavy vehicles were varied and sporadic. In some instances heavy vehicles remained uninspected and non-maintained for several years. A significant portion of vehicle maintenance was undertaken following the issue of defect notices, or following voluntary reports made by employed drivers. There were a total of 10 employed drivers during the relevant period. Further records revealed that the speedometer and odometer of a heavy vehicle was not working for approximately 3 weeks. The heavy vehicle was driven on roads during that time and the Defendant directed an employed driver to drive the heavy vehicle. The Defendant as an operator failed to ensure the safety of transport activities. The failure exposed individuals to a risk of death and/or serious injury. The Defendant failed to take reasonably practicable measures. The Defendant was required to produce 27 heavy vehicles as a result of a Notice issued by the NHVR. 11 heavy vehicles were produced. 10 of the 11 heavy vehicles were issued with defect notices. The Defendant failed to produce 16 heavy vehicles as they would not have passed inspection. The Defendant had no prior convictions. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): Placed on a 12 month Supervisory Intervention Order to complete the following conditions:
Other orders:
|
|
17 November 2021 Launceston Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of contravening a dimension requirement (severe risk breach); he had multiple prior breaches for similar offending. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
Victoria
| Court details | Offence | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
|
23 February 2024 Ringwood Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 5977, 6452, 5841 |
The defendant was intercepted by Victorian SCO’s on two occasions in November 2022 and May 2023. During the November 2022 intercept, the defendant was found to have been driving while their licence was cancelled. They were advised that they would be prosecuted in relation to this offence. The SCO’s conducted further investigations into the work activity undertaken by the defendant by reference to their work diary and identified persistent offending in the year preceding the intercept. The same SCO intercepted the defendant again in May 2023. The defendant’s licence was still cancelled. A significant brief was referred to the prosecution unit and the following charges were laid: Prosecution and defence counsel agreed to resolve the matter by rolling up 16 of the 17 false or misleading charges and all 13 of the failure to record information charges. This resulted in the matter being able to be resolved on a global basis while the magistrate could still take into account the ongoing and serious nature of the offences. The magistrate accepted the defendant’s early guilty plea, noting that the maximum penalty for their offending was extremely high. The magistrate reminded the defendant that their offending could have resulted in catastrophic consequences. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
7 September 2023 Dandenong Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 8031 |
A heavy vehicle was intercepted by Authorised Officers on Dandenong bypass at Keysborough. The driver advised they had loaded the vehicle and wasn’t aware of the restrictions on length. |
Section/Act
Fine
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): A 6-month SIO was ordered with the following conditions:
|
|
20 June 2023 Mildura Magistrates Court Defendant type: Corporation - AS 4506 |
Authorised Officers intercepted a prime mover in an AB triple combination which was connected to a tri-axle trailer, a tandem axle dolly and two tri-axle trailers. The trailers were loaded with three intermodal shipping containers. Dockets were provided to the Authorised Officers. However, the dockets did not mention the weight of the three containers and their contents. The intercepted AB triple combination was not allowed to operate in Victoria and required a permit which the Company had not obtained. The axle was weighed at 19,380kg which was 117% of the prescribed mass limit. The tri-axle was weighed at 22,980kg which 115% of the prescribed mass limit. The accused entered an early guilty plea and had no prior court matters. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
| 21 April 2023 Melbourne Magistrates' Court Defendant type: Consignor - AS 2944 |
The accused was a consignor. Investigations revealed that the accused breached its primary safety duty by failing to implement effective systems and procedures to ensure heavy vehicles consigned by it were adequately loaded and restrained. On 11 November 2019, a heavy vehicle, a prime mover, towed a skeletal semi-trailer carrying a 40-foot shipping container with 26 tonnes of timber plywood. The heavy vehicle rolled over in Dandenong where no injuries or deaths resulted. The NHVR’s investigation revealed that the consignor had failed to:
The Magistrate stated that the offending is risk based and it was incredibly fortunate via sheer luck no one was killed; and that general deterrence is the most significant sentencing factor. The Company made significant improvements to its policies and procedures since the rollover having spent approximately $150,000. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
7 February 2023 |
The defendant company was charged with two counts of permitting drivers to engage in transport activities using heavy vehicles which, combined with their load, were over the allowable mass limit on two separate occasions over the course of one month. In addition to both offences being in the severe breach category for being over mass, the loads on each occasion were not secured properly. The magistrate found that this was serious offending, posed a risk to the community, and that a penalty needed to be imposed which would deter other companies from engaging in this type of offending. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
3 February 2023 Dandenong Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual - AS 3688 |
On 20 October 2021, a heavy vehicle pulled into the Yarragon Weighbridge Westbound in Victoria and the driver was spoken to by the NHVR Authorised Officers. The driver’s NDWD was inspected by the Officer’s and offences were detected throughout that NDWD. The fatigue offending was detected between 12 August 2021 and 20 October 2021. The failure to record information offences were identified to have occurred between 6 October 2021 and 20 October 2021. 24 instances where the Defendant had failed to provide records to his record keeper (by removing the appropriate sheet from their NDWD and providing it to their employer) were identified between 19 September 2020 and 28 September 2021. These instances were rolled into one count. The Defendant indicated that they were not aware of a number of the rules and on other occasions things simply slipped their mind. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
10 August 2022 Heidelberg Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
Between 2 October 2021 and 14 December 2021 the accused made eight (8) false or misleading entries in his National Driver Work Diary. Additionally, on two (2) further occasions the accused failed to record the required information in his National Driver Work Diary when required. Since the offending, the accused has relocated to Western Australia and at the time of sentence was not operating heavy vehicles interstate |
Section/Act
Fine
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): For a period of twelve (12) months, the individual is to use an Electronic Work Diary to monitor and record his work and rest times when required to record his work and rest times as per the Heavy Vehicle National Law and Regulations.
For a period of twelve (12) months, the individual is required to provide copies of his work diary entries to the NHVR.
|
|
4 August 2022 Dandenong Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
On 15 September 2021 the individual was observed driving a heavy vehicle, in Doveton, Victoria. The heavy vehicle was intercepted for a compliance check. The individual was required to have a prescribed alcohol interlock device fitted to any heavy vehicle they operated. The individual had failed to comply with their licence requirements to fit an alcohol interlock device. In addition, the heavy vehicle's permitted rear overhang limit was 2,340mm. The heavy vehicle's rear overhang was measured at 3,000mm. Taking into account the applicable dimension adjustment, the vehicle's alleged rear overhang was 2,900mm, an excess length of 560mm. The contravention of the heavy vehicle's permitted rear overhang resulted in a Substantial risk breach. Since the date of offending, the individual no longer works in the heavy vehicle industry. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): Within the period of twelve (12) months of the signing of the Order, if the individual is to operate a heavy vehicle, prior to undertaking any transport activity, the individual must engage an accredited trainer and complete a training course in respect of mass, dimension and loading requirements under the Heavy Vehicle National Law and Regulations.
Within one (1) month of training being completed, the individual must provide evidence that he has completed the training to the NHVR At the end of each calendar month, for a period of twelve (12) months, the individual must confirm, in writing, to the NHVR whether he undertook any transport activities in a heavy vehicle in the preceding month. |
|
4 August 2022 Dandenong Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company - operator |
On 17 June 2020 a company was observed travelling in prime mover compromising of one, two tyred steer axle, together with one, eight tyred dual-drive tandem axle group. It was towing a two-axle sixteen tyred low loader dolly, which was connected to a five-axle forty tyred low loader. The heavy vehicle was loaded with a tadano crane. The company allowed the vehicle to travel on a non-approved route as per the Multi-State Class 1 Load Carrying Vehicle Mass Exemption Notice 2020 (No. 1) Schedule 4. A permit was produced but this permit was not valid for the trip. The company permitted a driver to drive the heavy vehicle without ensuring its components and load, complied with the applicable loading and mass requirements applying to the vehicle. The statutory permitted mass was 43,000kg. The alleged mass was 102,400kg. This is 238% of the prescribed mass limits (severe risk breach). The load, the tadano crane weighed 57,900kg. The way it was loaded did not comply with the performance standards. This resulted in a substantial risk breach. It did not comply with the Load Restraint Guide, specifically:
The company entered a plea of guilty and had two relevant prior court matters. |
Section/Act
Fine
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): Placed on a 6 month Supervisory Intervention Order to complete the following conditions: Within one (1) month of this Order being made, to engage a training provider to provide training to all senior management and persons responsible for the operations of transport activities within the company.
Within six (6) months of this Order being made, to provide to the NHVR the names and training records of all persons who complete the training. To provide to the NHVR the content of the training, including copies of any systems or written procedures implemented as a result of the training. |
|
11 July 2022 Wangaratta Magistrates Court Defendant type: CoR - Operator |
The accused faced a single charge of breaching section 26G of the HVNL. The accused failed to ensure the safety of his transport activities by failing to implement appropriate induction systems for drivers, fitness to drive procedures, and fatigue management. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other Orders:
|
|
11 July 2022 Frankston Magistrates Court Defendant type: Individual |
On 17 July 2019 a driver was observed driving in Dandenong North and was intercepted by Victoria police. Licence checks were conducted which revealed that the driver’s licence had been disqualified as a result of a Traffic Infringement Notice for a period of 13 months. The heavy vehicle was loaded with an excavator that had been inadequately restrained. This was categorised as a minor risk breach. On 24 September 2019 the driver was again observed driving a heavy vehicle being an Isuzu tipper towing a semi tray in Brighton. The driver was intercepted by VicRoads authorised officers. Licence checks were conducted which revealed that the driver’s licence had been disqualified. The heavy vehicle was loaded with a 3,600kg excavator which had been inadequately restrained. It was restrained by one chain looped through the rear of the machine and one strap over the two stacked buckets of the machine and was unblocked. This was insufficient restraint. This was categorised as a substantial risk breach. On 18 October 2021 the driver was observed driving a heavy vehicle, being a Kenworth tipper and was intercepted by NHVR officers in Cranbourne. Licence checks revealed they were disqualified from driving. The reason for the disqualification was due to a previous drink driving matter. The driver made admissions that he did not advise his employer that his licence was disqualified. The driver had prior driving matters. |
Section/Act
Fine
|
|
6 July 2022 Melbourne Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company |
On 18 November 2021 a company was observed travelling in heavy vehicle, namely a 3-axle prime mover in a combination with a 2x4 (8 tyre load sharing dolly) and 4x8 (16 tyre low loader dolly float). The heavy vehicle was loaded with an excavator. The vehicle was detected on a non-approved route as per the Class 1 Load Carrying Vehicle Dimension Exemption Notice and the Class 1 Load Carrying Vehicle Mass Exemption Notice. The company did not have a permit for the trip. The company permitted a driver to drive the heavy vehicle without ensuring its components and load, complied with the applicable dimension and mass requirements applying to the vehicle. The statutory permitted length was 19m. The alleged length was 26.1m, an excess length of 7.1m (severe risk breach). The statutory permitted width was 2.5m. The alleged length was 4.23m, an excess width of 1.73m (severe risk breach). The statutory permitted height was 4.3m. The alleged height was 4.46m, an excess height of 160mm (substantial risk breach). The permitted mass was 43,000kg. The alleged mass of the vehicle was 80,860kg, an excess mass of 37,860kg. This is 188% of the prescribed mass limit (severe risk breach). The company entered a plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity and had two relevant prior matters. |
Section/Act
Fine
Other orders:
Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO): Placed on a 6 month Supervisory Intervention Order to complete the following conditions: Within one (1) month of this Order being made, to engage a training provider to provide training to all senior management and persons responsible for the operations of transport activities within the company.
Within six (6) months of this Order being made, to provide to the NHVR the names and training records of all persons who complete the training To provide to the NHVR the content of the training, including copies of any systems or written procedures implemented as a result of the training |
|
28 June 2022 Mildura Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company |
The company was charged with one count of permitting its driver to drive a heavy vehicle on a road without complying with the loading requirements applying to the vehicle. The vehicle was carrying a load of bricks. Part of the load fell onto the road, nature strip and footpath near a retail shopping area and car park. This was a severe risk breach. This posed an appreciable safety risk to any pedestrians, drivers of other vehicles, or other road users in the vicinity of the fallen bricks. The company had no prior convictions. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
5 April 2022 Geelong Magistrates' Court Defendant type: Company |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of permitting another to operate a vehicle exceeding mass limit – severe risk breach; first time offender. The vehicle was transporting an excavator and the accused permitted a person to drive a heavy vehicle towing a quad axle low loader while exceeding the mass limit on the quad axle trailer. The alleged mass on quad axle was 39.64 tonnes and this exceeded the permitted mass (under exemption) of 35 tonnes. As a result the vehicle was 198.2% of the maximum allowed legislative mass limit of 20 tonnes and the offence was a severe risk breach. The location of excavator on the trailer was able to be adjusted to bring the load on the quad axle to under 35 tonnes, however this had not been done. |
Section/Act:
|
|
10 March 2022 Werribee Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company |
A company was observed travelling in a 3-axle prime mover, towing 2, 3-axle semi-container carriers in Laverton North. The A trailer was loaded with a 20-foot container and the B trailer was loaded with a 40-foot container. The company permitted a driver to drive the heavy vehicle without ensuring its components and load, complied with the mass requirements applying to the vehicle. The vehicle was intercepted, and the load inspected. It was revealed that the vehicle was travelling over the prescribed mass limits. The vehicle’s permitted mass on the tri-axle was 20,000kg. The vehicle’s alleged tri-axle mass was 30,020kg, an excess mass of 10,020kg. This is 150% of the prescribed mass limit. This is categorised as a severe risk breach. It is a requirement for an operator of a heavy vehicle to ensure the vehicle’s driver does not transport the freight container without a complying container weight declaration. The driver and the company were not able to produce container weight declarations for the two containers. The company had no prior convictions. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
17 February 2022 Werribee Magistrates Court Defendant type: Company |
A company was observed travelling in a B-double combination, with 2 x 40 foot containers. The company permitted a driver to drive the heavy vehicle without ensuring its components and load, complied with the dimension requirements applying to the vehicle. The vehicle was intercepted, and the load inspected. It was revealed that the vehicle was travelling over the prescribed dimension limits and the prime mover was registered to the incorrect category. The vehicle’s permitted length was 26m. The vehicle’s length was measured at 28.9m, an excess length of 2.9m. This is categorised as a severe risk breach. The prime mover was registered to a SP3 category, which is registered to tow a single semi-trailer. The prime mover was required to be registered to a MC3 category to two 2 semi-trailers. The company had no prior convictions. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other orders:
|
|
25 June 2021 Colac Magistrates Court Defendant type: Permit - |
The defendant was charged with 1 count of failing to obtain a permit which resulted in a severe breach occurring in relation to the length of overhang on the Heavy Vehicle that was being driven under the companies direction; first time offender. |
Section/Act:
Other orders:
|
| 1 July 2021 Dandenong Magistrates Court Defendant: Company |
A company was observed travelling in a prime mover towing an extendable heavy trailer, which was loaded with a crane gantry beam. The vehicle was intercepted, and the load inspected. It was revealed that the vehicle was travelling over the prescribed dimension limits. The company did not have a permit for the return trip. Accordingly, the dimensions were assessed against the statutory limits. The allowed length was 19m. The length of the vehicle was 33.5m, an excess length of 14.5m. The allowed width was 2.5m. The width of the vehicle was 2.75m, an excess width of 250mm. A permit would have allowed for a length of 45m and a width of 3.5m. The vehicle was about to cross a railway just prior to the intercept. It was revealed that the company failed to obtain permission to cross the railway. There were a total of 2 pilot vehicles. One of the pilots was not a certified level 2 pilot vehicle driver. There needed to be a minimum of 3 certified pilot vehicles to be used. The company had no prior convictions. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
27 May 2021 Sunshine Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
A driver was intercepted driving a heavy vehicle. The load was inspected. It was revealed that the vehicle was travelling over the prescribed dimension limits. The permitted width was 2.5m and the measured width was 2.7m, an excess width of 200mm. Database checks revealed the Defendant was driving without a licence and an unregistered vehicle. The Defendant provided a false name, address and date of birth and eventually provided his real details. The Defendant had prior convictions for driving offences, however no priors for Heavy Vehicle National Law offences. |
Section/Act:
Other Orders:
|
|
13 May 2021 Werribee Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
A driver was intercepted driving a prime mover towing a low loader, which was loaded with a container. The vehicle was intercepted and the load inspected. It was revealed that the vehicle was travelling over the prescribed dimension limits. The vehicle permitted length was 19m. The vehicles length was measured at 20.3m, an excess length of 1.3m. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other Orders:
|
|
23 April 2021 Broadmeadows Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
A driver was intercepted driving a heavy vehicle, being a freightliner tow truck coupled to a refrigerated trailer. It was revealed that the vehicle had breached its mass and dimension requirements. The vehicle was loaded at 124% of the applicable mass limit of the tandem drive. The vehicles allowed length was 26m as the Defendant had a permit, however due to breaching the permit the length reverted to the statutory limit of 19m. The length of the vehicle was 29.06m, an excess length of 10.06m. The Defendant had prior driving matters, however had no priors for Heavy Vehicle National Law matters. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other Orders:
|
|
20 April 2021 Broadmeadows Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
A driver was intercepted driving a heavy vehicle. It was revealed that the vehicle had breached its loading requirements and dimension requirements. The vehicle was loaded with a tautliner truck body and chassis and other metal items. The vehicle was only secured by a single 1x50mm strap, and the items on the tray of the truck were loose and completely unrestrained. It was also revealed that the vehicles dimension requirements were not complied with. The permitted width was 2.5m, with an excess width of 380mm. The permitted height was 4.3m, with an excess height of 270mm. The permitted rear overhang was 3.33m, with an excess rear overhang of 1,020mm. The Defendant had priors for minor risk dimension and loading offences against the Heavy Vehicle National Law |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other Orders:
|
|
9 March 2021 Werribee Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
A driver was intercepted driving a skip bin truck. Database checks revealed that the Defendant’s licence was disqualified. An inspection of the vehicle was conducted. The vehicle was found to be in an unsafe condition. Issues included the brake shoes being worn down to the rivets, front and rear spring shackle buses worn excessively, rear torque rod bushes non-existent and oil leaks to the control unit. The defendant had prior driving matters, however had no priors for Heavy Vehicle National Law matters. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
Other Orders:
|
|
19 September 2019 Horsham Magistrates Court Defendant: Company |
A company on 2 occasions was observed travelling as a class 1 heavy vehicle along the highway, routine inspection of the combinations indicated that the vehicles, after checking with their mass and dimension exemption permit, were operating outside the conditions of their mass and dimension exemption permit. It was also found that the class 1 heavy vehicles were over length (on both occasions) and over height. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
|
19 September 2019 Horsham Magistrates Court Defendant: Driver |
Driver intercepted in a heavy vehicle with observation that the vehicle may be overloaded and also observed no load restraint covering the load of soil, which was loaded over the waterline. Heavy vehicle was weighed on portable weighing devices and found to be loaded at 121% of it mass, thus a severe risk mass breach. |
Section/Act:
Fine:
|
Case learnings
- Case learnings – February 2024 (PDF, 350KB)
- Case learnings - January 2024 (PDF, 313KB)
- Case learnings - December 2023 (PDF, 491KB)
- Case learnings - November 2023 (b) (PDF, 330KB)
- Case learnings - November 2023 (a) (PDF, 270KB)
- Case learnings - October 2023 (PDF, 287KB)
- Case learnings - September 2023 (b) (PDF, 351KB)
- Case learnings - September 2023 (a) (PDF, 294KB)
- Case learnings - August 2023 (PDF, 331KB)
- Case learnings - July 2023 (b) (PDF, 321KB)
- Case learnings - July 2023 (a) (PDF, 294KB)
- Case learnings - June 2023 (PDF, 489KB)
- Case learnings - May 2023 (PDF, 386KB)
- Case learnings - April 2023 (PDF, 431KB)
- Case learnings - February 2023 (PDF, 248KB)
Primary duty court matters
Primary duty matters comparative sentencing schedule under the HVNL.