Company AS 67825: fined $22,500, mass, 27 August 2026
Party
- Party
- Company AS 67825. The NHVR publishes court outcomes without the defendant's name.
- Type
- Company
- Role
- Role not stated
- Reference
- AS 67825
The proceeding
- Decision
- Convicted
- Court
- Lithgow Local Court (Local or Magistrates)
- Jurisdiction
- New South Wales
- Hearing date
- 27 August 2026
- Law
- Heavy Vehicle National Law
- Provisions
- s 96(1)(c)
- Offence
- Mass
Facts
On 6 May 2026 the Regulator’s authorised officers inspected a heavy vehicle travelling on the Great Western Highway. The Defendant operator had permitted a driver to operate the vehicle while it exceeded its permitted first axle mass. The first axle mass was measured at 13.56 tonnes, being more than 2.5 tonnes in excess of the maximum permitted mass, representing 120.54% of the permitted mass. The offence constituted a severe risk breach under the applicable mass requirements. The Court noted that the he Defendant company was a recidivist offender and had failed to learn from its previous non-compliance and appeared to be treating the penalties as a cost of doing business. This approach was compromising public safety. The Court needed to send a strong message to larger companies about the importance of compliance and maintaining public safety. The Court took into account the size of the company when determining the appropriate penalty. It was noted that the offending occurred after the implementation of a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO), demonstrating that the company had failed to learn from previous compliance issues and continued to offend.
As reported by NHVR.
Penalty
- Fine
- $22,500
Fines under s 96(1)(c) on the register: $750 to $60,000, median $10,000 across 85 matters.
Educational point
Operators are exposed to significant and increasing penalties for repeated offenders.
As reported by NHVR.
What the record would have shown
The loaded mass, weighed or calculated against the vehicle's limits before it left the site, kept with the consignment record. How the record works →
Comparable actions
| Defendant | Offence | Jurisdiction | Decision | Date | Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qube Ports Pty Ltd | Mass | NSW | Enforceable undertaking accepted; enforceable undertaking | Date not stated | View the record of Qube Ports Pty Ltd, Date not stated |
| Laing O’Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd | Mass | Not stated | Enforceable undertaking accepted; enforceable undertaking | Date not stated | View the record of Laing O’Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd, Date not stated |
| Ferrycarrig Construction Pty Ltd | Mass | Not stated | Enforceable undertaking accepted; enforceable undertaking | Date not stated | View the record of Ferrycarrig Construction Pty Ltd, Date not stated |
| Zezt Pty Ltd | Mass | Not stated | Enforceable undertaking accepted; enforceable undertaking | Date not stated | View the record of Zezt Pty Ltd, Date not stated |
| Eifers Pty Ltd | Mass | Not stated | Enforceable undertaking accepted; enforceable undertaking | Date not stated | View the record of Eifers Pty Ltd, Date not stated |
Sources
- NHVR: Court outcomes (read 14 October 2026)
Something here wrong? Report an error and name the source that shows it.
Register entry ea-4f05bda3c544, as at 14 October 2026. How the register is built.