Coffield Trading Pty Ltd and sole company director Shayne Coffield have both been sentenced in the Ballarat Magistrates’ Court for their failure to engage a Class A asbestos removalist and their failure to obtain a clearance certificate prior to re-entering a residential demolition site.
Coffield Trading (trading as Calora Demolitions at some sites) was engaged by a property owner to undertake demolition works at a residential facility in Lake Wendouree, Ballarat. The company requested the property owner to obtain a Division 6 Asbestos Audit prior to creating a quote for the work. An asbestos consultant was engaged who carried out an inspection and produced a Division 6 Asbestos & Hazardous Materials Survey (Asbestos Survey) for the site. The Asbestos Survey identified Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) throughout the site, which included both friable and nonfriable asbestos. ACM was identified at 23 locations throughout the workplace.
The Asbestos Survey required ACM to be removed prior to the commencement of demolition or refurbishment work at the workplace. To do so, it required the engagement of an asbestos removal contractor with a Class A licence and for a hygienist to provide a clearance inspection and certificate at the completion of asbestos removal work, which must be undertaken by a competent person independent of the asbestos removalist. The clearance certificate allows for the safe re-occupation of the area, provided no asbestos residue is present.
The Asbestos Survey was provided to Coffield Trading, who then provided a formal quote for the work, which included the ‘removal and disposal of asbestos as per audit’. Coffield then commenced work on the demolition in December 2023 without satisfying the conditions of the Asbestos Survey. In June 2024 a WorkSafe inspector attended the site and a non-disturbance notice was issued requiring all demolition and clean-up work to be stopped due to the acknowledged presence of asbestos.
WorkSafe later returned to the site with an asbestos consultant who confirmed by inspection and testing that all samples taken contained non-friable asbestos that was able to be removed by a Class B Licensed Asbestos Removalist. A second Asbestos Survey was produced by the consultant, and an improvement notice was issued by WorkSafe Inspectors. Coffield Trading later complied with the improvement notice by engaging a licenced asbestos removalist to remove ACM and by obtaining a clearance certificate prior to re-occupying the workplace.
WorkSafe’s investigation revealed that Shayne Coffield had held a Class B asbestos removal licence, but it had expired four years prior, and that he had removed asbestos where the total area of non-friable ACM exceeded 10 square metres. The Asbestos Survey for the property required that a Class A asbestos remover was required to perform the removal.
It was clear that there was a risk that the demolition works were likely to disturb asbestos containing material and that airborne asbestos fibres would be released and inhaled by persons at the workplace, resulting in asbestos related disease. Coffield Trading had failed to eliminate or reduce the risk by ensuring that they took the steps required by the Asbestos Survey.
Coffield Trading pleaded guilty to the charge of breaching s.26(1) OHS Act and was, without conviction, sentenced to pay a fine of $12,000.
Shayne Coffield pleaded guilty to the charges of breaching s.26(1) and s. 144(1) of the OHS Act and the Court adjourned the proceedings for 12 months, without conviction, and made an order under s.137 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 for his release upon giving a health and safety undertaking to:
- engage with a consultant approved in writing by the authority to advise on or assist with occupational health and safety matter by way of a full day of asbestos awareness training; and
- be of good behaviour.
The maximum applicable penalty value for a breach of s.26 of the OHS Act at the time of the incident was approximately $340,000 for a natural person and $1.7million for a company.
In sentencing Shayne Coffield, the Court noted that the offending and proceedings had quite an impact and that Mr Coffield took the matter seriously and expressed genuine remorse, engaged with WorkSafe and took action to remediate problems at the workplace as soon as possible, to the credit of Mr Coffield and his company. The Court also noted that his breaches of the OHS Act arose in the context of a misunderstanding and failure to comprehend the asbestos survey carried out prior to demolition works commencing.
To assist business owners in understanding their duties and obligations in relation to asbestos WorkSafe publishes a range of free guidance materials:
- · Asbestos | WorkSafe Victoria
- · Asbestos: Safety basics | WorkSafe Victoria
- · Compliance code: Managing asbestos in workplaces | WorkSafe Victoria
- · Compliance code: Removing asbestos in workplaces | WorkSafe Victoria
The Victorian government also provide free guidance at their Asbestos in Victoria website.
In February 2025 the Sentencing Advisory Council released a report to the Victorian Government making 12 recommendations for reform regarding the sentencing of OHS offences in Victoria. This included significantly increasing maximum penalties for breaching OHS duties in line with community expectations. The Victorian Government is yet to provide a response to this report.
Read more: Prosecution Result Summaries and Enforceable Undertakings | WorkSafe Victoria