• Workplace health and safety legislation
  • Amendments to workplace health and safety legislation
  • How the legislation works
  • Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995
  • Workplace Health and Safety Regulation 2008
  • Ministerial notices
  • Codes of Practice
  • Who enforces the law
  • Boards of inquiry
  • Workplace consultation
  • Regulatory impact statements
  • Provisional Improvement Notice (PIN)
  • Harmonisation of OHS laws
• Inspections
  • Workplace incidents and inspections
  • Inspectors' powers
  • Inspector conduct
  • Enforcement options
  • Making a complaint
  • Investigations
• Prosecutions
  • Cause to prosecute
  • Defences
  • Appeals and internal review of decisions
  • Access to your information
  • Publishing policy
• Penalties
  • What is a breach?
  • What is the maximum penalty?
  • Fines
• Enforceable undertakings
  • Enforceable undertakings process

• Rights and obligations
• Risk management
• Workplace incidents and inspections

	Print-friendly page
	Print full Laws and prosecutions subject (PDF, 255 KB)

Prosecution criteria

Workplace Health and Safety Queensland actively draws public attention to individuals and organisations it successfully prosecutes for breaching the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 (PDF, 766 KB).

The Queensland Workplace Health and Safety, Electrical Safety and Dangerous Goods Safety Management Compliance and Enforcement Policy 2009 (PDF, 517 KB) outlines the Departments prosecution criteria.

When and why will a decision to prosecute be made?

The decision on whether to bring a prosecution for a breach of OHS legislation is one of the most significant as the effect on those impacted by the decision (the defendant, worker or family of a deceased worker for instance) will be considerable. The Department operates within a broader prosecutorial framework as part of the criminal justice system that requires the highest standard of integrity to be applied to prosecutorial decision-making.

The Department will apply the Queensland Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) guidelines in determining the question as to whether or not a prosecution should be commenced or, if commenced, should proceed. They are as follows:

• the existence of a prima facie case, that is, whether the evidence is sufficient to justify the institution of proceedings.
• a reasonable prospect of conviction, that is, an evaluation of how strong the case is likely to be when presented in court. This takes into account such matters as the availability, competence and credibility of witnesses and their likely impression on the court or tribunal that will determine the matter, and the admissibility of any confession or other evidence, and any lines of defence available to the defendant.
• the public interest which may include (but is not limited to) the following considerations:

  • the seriousness or, conversely, the triviality of the alleged offence or whether it is only of a technical nature
  • any mitigating or aggravating circumstances
  • the characteristics of the obligation holder
  • any special infirmities, prior compliance history and background
  • the age of the alleged offence
  • the degree of culpability of the alleged offender
  • whether the prosecution would be perceived as counter
  • productive, that is, by bringing the law into disrepute
  • the availability and efficacy of any alternatives to prosecution
  • the prevalence of the alleged offence and the need for deterrence, both specific and general, and
  • whether the alleged offence is of considerable public concern.