Avoiding WHS proceedings requires training, policy implementation

Reflecting on a recent WHS appeal case, a lawyer emphasised the responsibility that HR must mitigate workplace risks and avoid legal implications.

Appeal dismissed

In B.M.D. Constructions Pty Ltd v Nicholson [2026] QDC 5, the District Court of Queensland found that in 2020, a labour hire worker, William Sills, had his calf lacerated after his leg was run over by a grader operator.

In her 30 January 2026 decision, Judge Dominique Grigg ruled that B.M.D. Constructions should have mitigated the incident by implementing supervision or spotting of workers, dismissing the appeal.

Clyde & Co partner Luke O’Kane said this case reveals how safety policies alone will not protect organisations from court action and that implementation of a safe working environment is necessary.

Far-ranging implications

O’Kane noted the implications of this case are far-ranging and could impact industries beyond construction, including disability care, childcare, pubs, and clubs, which should equally ensure their policies are implemented to mitigate against work health and safety (WHS) risks.

“[This case] underscores that the construction industry has always been and will always be a risky enterprise or a risky area,” O’Kane said.

The full picture

O’Kane emphasised that HR must provide staff with training on work safety policies and procedures as well as their implementation. He stressed that the policy is not useful if it is not implemented to mitigate these workplace risks.

He noted that HR is on the front lines protecting their organisation and speaking with all relevant stakeholders.

O’Kane emphasised that HR teams must procure information as quickly as possible to brace for investigations by authorities.

“When risk ameliorates or arises, it’s really incumbent on us to get as much information and get as full a picture as possible, and as early as possible,” he said.

“It can ameliorate the risk that they actually bring [a] prosecution against you.”