OHS Solutions -

01/10/2025

Victoria’s Workplace Manslaughter Laws – Important reminders for Owners Corporations
December 17, 2024
VIC

As of 1 July 2020, Victoria saw a new set of occupational health and safety laws come into effect by amendments to the Occupational Health & Safety Act 2004 (Vic) (OHS Act) by the Workplace Safety Legislation Amendments (Workplace Manslaughter and Other Matters) Bill 2019 (Vic). The new legislation applies to the negligent conduct of employers (or other duty holders) causing death to whom a duty of care is owed. The penalties under the new legislation are significant and include a maximum of 25 years imprisonment for individuals and a fine in excess of $19 million for body corporates.

The recent case of R v LH Holding Management Pty Ltd & Laith Hanna1 is the first case an employer was convicted under Victoria’s new workplace manslaughter laws. It underscores crucial lessons for owners corporations, particularly in overseeing tradesmen and suppliers working on strata schemes. Below is a summary of the key learnings and safety considerations.

Overview
On 19 February 2024, LH Holding Management Pty Ltd (LH Holding) and Laith Hanna (Hanna), the sole director and secretary of LH Holding, were sentenced by the Victorian Supreme Court following guilty pleas to the workplace manslaughter of Michael Tsahrelias (Tsahrelias). LH Holding was fined $1.3 million, and Hanna was sentenced to a two-year Community Correction Order (CCO), with conditions including that Hanna complete 200 hours of community work and undertake a forklift operation course. Additionally, LH Holding and Hanna, by consent, were ordered to pay $120,000 in compensation to Tsahrelias’s sister, in turn for Tsahrelias’s parents compensation claims being dismissed.

Background
LH Holding operated a stonemasonry factory under the direction of Hanna. Tsahrelias and his father, through their family business, were subcontracted by LH Holding to work at the factory.

On 12 October 2021, Hanna was operating a forklift to move an empty A-frame steel rack from inside the factory to an outside area. Upon manoeuvring the forklift, the 2-metre suspended load began to swing and Tsahrelias attempted to stabilise the load with his arms. Hanna, with Tsahrelias in close proximity, then began to reverse the forklift up the sloped driveway, however the forklift lost balance, began to tip sideways and toppled over, crushing Tsahrelias beneath it. The incident, captured by CCTV, revealed its severity and Hanna’s failure to ensure Tsahrelias’ safety.

Charges and sentencing
Following the incident, LH Holding was charged under section 39G(1) of the OHS Act for workplace manslaughter, and Hanna was charged under section 39G(2) as an officer whose failure to take reasonable care contributed to the manslaughter. Both Hanna and LH Holding pleaded guilty to the charges.

Hanna, in his interview with WorkSafe, acknowledged that he had failed to follow the safety protocols and that more caution should have been exercised given the elevated and irregular load and the sloped driveway. Ultimately, LH Holding and Hanna were found negligent for breaching their duty of care.

In sentencing, the court considered extensive submissions, including victim impact statements from Tsahrelias’ family, the guilty pleas, mitigating factors, deterrence and prospects of rehabilitation.

The court imposed the following sentences:

LH Holding was fined $1.3 million.
Hanna was sentenced to a two-year community detention order (CCO), with conditions to complete 200 hours of community work and a forklift operation course.
LH Holding and Hanna were ordered to pay $120,000 in compensation to Tsahrelias’ sister.
The sentences and penalties imposed on LH Holding and Hanna aim to serve as a deterrent and reinforce the need for strict compliance with occupational health and safety regulations to prevent future tragedies.

Key takeaways for owners corporations
The workplace manslaughter provisions under the OHS Act (Part 5A) are designed to prevent workplace deaths and impose severe penalties to reflect the seriousness of breaches leading to fatal incidents.

Although the OHS Act refers to the legislation applying to individuals and bodies corporate, the OHS Act extends to owners corporations (OC) as a legal entity. Accordingly, and in light of the new legislation, an OC ought to be remain mindful of the following:

An OC has a duty of care to maintain the common property and to maintain a safe environment for anyone who enters or undertakes work.
An OC’s duty of care is to all employees, contractors, owners, residents, visitors or general members of the public who enter common property.
The new laws concern existing duties of an OC under the OHS Act, however their penalties are now more significant when a breach results in death.
To reduce risk, the OC must be proactive at discharging its functions to repair and maintain common property and its duties to act in good faith and with due care and diligence in ensuring all safety protocols and measures are in place to avoid any catastrophic incidents.
An OC may manage occupational health and safety in several ways. For example:

Risk assessments: the OC may obtain a health and safety occupational report to assess the common property to identify potential hazards and prevent accidents.
Safety audits: if the OC has employees, it may engage WorkSafe to carry out an occupational health and safety audit on the common property.
Repair and maintenance: promptly attending to repair and maintenance of common property.
Communication: inform lot owners and occupations of any hazards and provide clear instructions to avoid danger.
Maintenance Plan: the OC reviews its maintenance plan and engages specialised professionals to inspect the common property to assist with risk assessment, maintenance fund forecast, capital works and budgeting. Even if there is no maintenance plan, an OC should review maintenance of works that are necessary, the cost and timing for the maintenance work.
Summary
The tragic case of Tsahrelias highlights the severe consequences of failing to maintain workplace safety and serves as a stark reminder to OCs of the critical importance of safety in managing tradesmen and suppliers within strata schemes. OC managers must actively engage in creating and maintaining a safe working environment, ensuring all safety measures are in place and that legal requirements are met. Through ensuring all safety protocols are followed, an OC can prevent such incidents, safeguard lives and avoid severe legal and financial repercussions.

1. R v LH Holding Management Pty Ltd & Hanna [2024] VSC 90. [2024] VSC 90.



Written by Leila Idris, Partner and Eleni Tasiopoulos, Lawyer, Grace Lawyers

23/09/2025

Another tragic forklift death- preventable by talking about the problem at toolbox meetings, regular safety walks to ensure a safe workplace , and separation of pedestrians from mechanized traffic, by walk lines and bollards

27/08/2025

Current safety news from Comcare

John Holland charged over reservoir fall
27 August 2025

Construction company John Holland has been charged with breaching federal work health and safety laws after a worker suffered serious injuries in a fall.

Following a Comcare investigation, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions has filed a single charge alleging John Holland Pty Ltd failed in its duties under the Commonwealth Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (WHS Act).

The incident happened on 25 August 2023 at the Helensburgh Reservoir, south of Sydney, where John Holland was Sydney Water’s principal contractor to complete relining and roof replacement works.

A contracted worker from an abrasive blasting firm was cleaning and removing debris from the top of the reservoir when he fell more than six metres to the floor, suffering multiple fractures to his ribs and spine.

The charge alleges John Holland failed to take a range of measures to eliminate or minimise the risks of working at height, including:

Ensuring a risk assessment was conducted and that it identified fall risks and appropriate control measures
Directing that further control measures, such as signage, be implemented in relation to the risk of falls from internal scaffolding
Implementing control measures such as regular inspections to ensure handrails on scaffolding remained installed.
The charge is a Category 2 offence under the WHS Act, carrying a maximum penalty of $1.5 million.

The matter is listed for mention in Sydney’s Downing Centre Local Court on 16 September.

John Holland Pty Ltd is a licenced national employer in the Comcare scheme and subject to regulation under Commonwealth work health and safety laws.

01/10/2024

With 73 deaths in 2023, forklift operators are deemed to have the most dangerous job in Australia, this article explains why and what can be done about it

The manufacturing industry continues to struggle with workplace deaths after a fatality last week at the Cleanaway landfill site at Lucas Heights in Sydney’s southwest.That tragic news came in a week

13/08/2024

Victoria has the most OHS prosecutions !
The prosecutions repository provides national information on criminal prosecutions for breaching WHS laws or regulations since 1 January 2020. Developed in response to the 2018 Senate inquiry report They never came home – the framework surrounding the prevention, investigation and prosecution of industrial deaths in Australia, the prosecutions data helps inform decision-making to improve WHS outcomes.
Key findings from the 2023 data include:
• 293 prosecutions were recorded for breaching WHS Acts and/or regulations in Australia in 2023
• 15% (45) prosecutions involved a fatal injury
• the average financial penalty was $138,724
• the total financial penalties equal $39,952,442
• in 72% of cases, the defendant PCBU pled guilty, while in fewer than 1% of cases, the defendant PCBU pled not guilty, and 27% of pleas were unknown or not published.

01/06/2024

Bypassing machine guarding results in degloving of workers hand after one on the job

A roofing manufacturer in Warrnambool has also been convicted and fined $40,000. Uniroll Roofing faced court after it was alleged a worker was instructed to circumvent a machine’s safeguard to clean it. During court proceedings, it was revealed that in April 2022, an employee who only worked at Uniroll Roofing for only a week was asked to operate a metal forming press. When operating the machinery, the new employee observed that the metal sheets had marks on them, so they stopped the machine to clean it. The worker alleged that when he was in the process of doing this, the company’s co-owner told him there was a better way to clean the machine, showing the worker how to bypass the safety guarding while the machine was still operating. Moments later, the cleaning instrument he was using got caught in one of the rollers, pulling his hand into the machine, resulting in his hand being crushed and two of his fingers being degloved.

Penalties

According to WorkSafe Victoria, on the 16th of May Uniroll Roofing Pty Ltd faced Warrnambool Magistrates Court and was sentenced after they ‘pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to provide or maintain a safe system of work and one charge of failing to provide employees with necessary information, instruction or training’. In the worker’s recovery, they were required to have multiple surgeries and were unable to return to full-time duties until August 2022 when they ceased working for the company. The business was fined $40,000 and was ordered to pay $4207 in costs.

03/04/2024

Another WorkSafe prosecution relating to working at heights with no scaffolding and no SWMS.

Date: 02/04/2024
New Prosecution Result Summaries and Enforceable Undertakings have been published on the WorkSafe Victoria website.

Col Gowers Homes Proprietary Limited
The offender is a family business that operates as a builder of residential houses across the Sunraysia region.
On 4 July 2022, a WorkSafe inspector attended a residential premises in Mildura ('the workplace') where the offender was constructing a two storey dwelling. At the workplace, the inspector observed four employees (including an apprentice) laying flooring sheets for the first storey of the dwelling under construction at a height of approximately 3.5 metres with no fall protection measures in place. The work being conducted was high risk construction work (HRCW) as defined by the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations 2017 ('OHS Regulations').
The employees were directed to the ground and one of the offender’s co-directors attended the workplace. The director informed the inspector that a scaffold had been ordered but had not arrive on time. The offender was unable to provide evidence that a SWMS has been prepared for the HRCW.
The inspector issued two notices:
1. A prohibition notice prohibiting working at a height greater than 2 metres until fall protection was installed; and
2. An improvement notice requiring the offender to prepare a SWMS for the HRCW being conducted at the workplace.
During subsequent visits, the inspector observed that scaffolding and an edge protection railing had been fitted to the entire perimeter of the working at heights area, with egress via two ladders fixed to the scaffolding. A SWMS had also been prepared for the HRCW. The notices were deemed to have been complied with.
The offender pleaded guilty to one offence contrary to section 21(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 ('OHS Act') and regulations 44(2) and 327(1) of the OHS Regulations. The employer failed to control the risk associated with a fall from height at the workplace, and had performed HRCW without having prepared a SWMS for the work before the work commenced.
The offender was sentenced, without conviction, to pay a fine of $10,000 and ordered to pay costs of $4,303.
Sentencing
In sentencing the offender, the Court accepted in mitigation that:
• the early plea of guilty is indicative of remorse and is of utilitarian benefit;
• the offender is a local family business which has been operating in the region for more than two decades without any priors;
• offender has a history of good corporate citizenship and has made significant contributions to the community; and
• the offender achieved quick compliance with remedial measures.
The Court indicated, pursuant to section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, had it not been for the plea of guilty, the offender would have been sentenced to pay a fine of $15,000 with conviction in respect of the charge.

27/03/2024

The end of a toxic product in Australian workplaces !

WHS Ministers Agree on Crystalline Silica Regulations

Last Friday (22nd March 2024) WHS Ministers met regarding the engineered stone ban. The Australian Institute of Occupational Hygienists (AIOH) has said that this national approach to the prevention of silica-related diseases across all at-risk industries, building on the Victorian high risk crystalline silica work regulation in place since 2021, is one of the most significant changes to national health and safety regulation in Australia in the past two decades.

Importantly, agreement was reached on a number of important issues:
1. From 1 July 2024, engineered stone (ES) benchtops, panels, and slabs are prohibited due to respirable crystalline silica risk with a transition period up to 31 December 2024 for contracts signed prior to the prohibition announcement. Sintered stone, porcelain and specific low risk non-resin products are exempted.
2. Exemptions will be available, requiring "compelling evidence" to succeed. Safe Work Australia will oversee the application process and cross border recognition of exemptions to avoid confusion and inconsistency.
3. The risks from alternative products will be reviewed to prevent suppliers evading the prohibition (e.g. through rebranding).
4. Regulations for industries handling crystalline silica will be strengthened, focusing on risk identification, control plans, training, and health monitoring. Uncontrolled processing of crystalline silica substances will be prohibited and respirable crystalline silica exposures exceeding the workplace exposure standard will have to be reported to the WHS regulator.

To further understand how you could be affected by this legislative change, please contact OHS Solutions on 1300 609 983 or admin@ohssolutions. net .au.

Kind regards,

Dr Christopher Webster
Principal

06/03/2024

Gaging sexual harassment claims

01/03/2024

After seeing a male for a pre-employment exam weighing in at 177 kg I thought it be good to cardio vascular killers -pulmonary embolism

How Long Before a Pulmonary Embolism Turns Fatal
Timeline From Onset of Symptoms to Hospitalization

By Pamela Assid, DNP, RN
Published on December 16, 2022
Medically reviewed by Sanja Jelic, MD

A pulmonary embolism (PE) results from a blood clot lodged in the lungs. This clot usually originates from breaking off another clot elsewhere in the body, typically the legs.1 With rapid treatment, most people affected by pulmonary embolism can recover.
However, a pulmonary embolism is considered a life-threatening emergency because the clot blocks blood flow into the lungs, causing pressure on the heart's right ventricle (chamber), eventually leading to excessive heart strain and death.
This article reviews blood clot fatality, the formation and travel time of clots to the lungs, symptoms and risk factors of pulmonary embolism, and when to seek medical care.

Are Blood Clots Fatal?

Studies estimate the incidence of pulmonary embolism in the United States at 1 per 1,000 people per year, equating to 200,000 to 300,000 hospital admissions per year. It is estimated that as many as 30,000 to 50,000 Americans die yearly from PE.2
Because of variations in the severity of the clot blockage to the lung's blood vessels and the pressure exerted on the heart's right ventricle, health outcomes vary. However, the pulmonary embolism's impact on the heart's right ventricle function is the most common cause of pulmonary embolism death.3
For people with pulmonary embolism but no associated decrease in right ventricle function, estimates place mortality (death) at around 2%. People with PE causing increased stress on the heart's right ventricle have a greater than 15% mortality rate.3
Therefore, knowing the signs and symptoms of a pulmonary embolism and seeking rapid treatment is crucial to long-term survival.

Formation and Travel Time to Lungs

Pulmonary embolisms almost always begin as a distant clot in the arms or legs.4 Small pieces can break off and travel through the body's blood vessels as the distant clot grows. While smaller pieces might pass through the lungs without a problem, larger fragments of the clot can lodge in the lung's blood vessels and create a pulmonary embolism.5
The size of the distant clot piece that lodges in the lung and how quickly that lodged piece starts to grow in the lung's blood vessels will affect how quickly pulmonary embolism forms.

Identifying the Signs of a Pulmonary Embolism

People affected by pulmonary embolism can have different signs and symptoms. These may vary depending on the size of the PE, how much the lung is affected by lack of blood flow, and any underlying medical conditions, which can worsen PE formation.6
The most common symptoms of pulmonary embolism are:6
• Shortness of breath
• Chest pain that might worsen when breathing in
• Cough
• Leg or arm pain or swelling, which could be where the distant clot formed
• Pain in the upper back
• Excessive sweating
• Light-headedness, dizziness, or passing out
• A bluish tinge to lips or nails due to lack of properly oxygenated blood in the body's blood vessels

Risk Factors

Some risk factors associated with pulmonary embolism include:4
• Inactivity, such as during a long car or plane ride, can cause distant clots to form.
• Other medical conditions, like cancer or heart disease, can elevate the risk for PE.
• Smoking can cause blood vessel disease, leading to the formation of distant clots and elevating PE risk.
• Obesity is linked to medical conditions like heart disease or blood vessel disease, which can elevate PE risk.
• Supplemental estrogen from hormone replacement therapy or some birth control pills with higher estrogen levels is linked to a higher risk of blood clot formation and PE risk.
• Pregnancy can cause clots due to the weight and pressure the baby puts on veins in the pelvis. This can slow blood flow in the legs and cause distant clot formation.
• Inherited genetic conditions can elevate the risk of blood clot formation.

When to Seek Immediate Medical Attention

Identifying a distant clot before it turns into a pulmonary embolism offers the best option for optimal health and recovery. Symptoms of a distant clot in the arms or legs may include:5
• Pain
• Swelling
• Redness
• Localized warmth, usually around the area of swelling or redness
If a clot has moved to the lungs, there are different signs and symptoms to be aware of. If you're experiencing any of the below signs or symptoms, you should seek immediate medical attention:5
• Chest pain
• Shortness of breath
• The feeling of a racing heart (an increase in heart rate)
• Upper back pain
• Coughing, including coughing up pink or blood-tinged secretions

Summary
A pulmonary embolism, or blood clot in the lungs, usually forms when a distant clot—usually from the arms or legs—breaks off and travels to the lungs. A PE is a medical emergency, but with quick identification and treatment, most people can recover without compromising overall health and wellness.
If you're experiencing symptoms of a pulmonary embolism, such as chest pain, difficulty breathing, or upper back pain, you should seek immediate medical attention to determine whether a PE is present and receive prompt treatment.

07/02/2024

New welding fume inhalation is now law in Australia go to https://www.apexweldingsafety.com.au/
to find out how to comply and not breach these new workplace laws

AWS is the sole agent for the 3M Speedglas brand in Australia and New Zealand. Get the latest welding helmets, training programs, and safety news here!