Company · no NHVR reference: fined $21,000, mass, 10 March 2022
Party
- Party
- Company · no NHVR reference. The NHVR publishes court outcomes without the defendant's name.
- Type
- Company
- Role
- Role not stated
The proceeding
- Decision
- Guilty, no conviction recorded
- Court
- Werribee Magistrates Court (Local or Magistrates)
- Jurisdiction
- Victoria
- Hearing date
- 10 March 2022
- Law
- Heavy Vehicle National Law
- Provisions
- s 96(1)(c), s 191(1)
- Offence
- Mass
- Charges
- 3
Facts
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. Penalty: Fine: $21,000 global penalty; Plus prosecution costs
As reported by NHVR.
Penalty
- Fine
- $21,000
Fines under s 96(1)(c) on the register: $750 to $60,000, median $10,000 across 85 matters. Fines under s 191(1) on the register: $7,000 to $21,000, median $14,000 across 2 matters.
Prior history
The source states no prior history.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| 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 |
| Individual · name withheld | Mass | VIC | Enforceable undertaking accepted; enforceable undertaking | Date not stated | View the record of Individual, 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 |
Sources
- NHVR: Court outcomes (read 14 October 2026)
Something here wrong? Report an error and name the source that shows it.
Register entry ea-73d8c0c300b8, as at 14 October 2026. How the register is built.