← The register · Mass

NHVR court outcome, unnamedConvicted

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

DefendantOffenceJurisdictionDecisionDateRecord
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

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.