Australian regulators have moved from guidance to action. Over the past two years, SafeWork NSW, WorkSafe Victoria, and WorkSafe WA have each tested the boundaries of psychosocial hazard enforcement through prosecutions, prohibition notices, and enforceable undertakings. Some succeeded. Some were withdrawn. All of them carry lessons for organisations trying to understand what compliance actually requires.

This article examines the key enforcement actions to date, what they reveal about regulatory expectations, and how the landscape is likely to shift as Victoria's new Psychological Health Regulations take effect.

The Landmark Conviction: Court Services Victoria (2023)

The most significant psychosocial hazard prosecution to result in conviction remains WorkSafe Victoria's case against Court Services Victoria (CSV), the body responsible for administering Victoria's court system.

The facts: From 2015 to 2018, workers at the Coroners Court of Victoria were exposed to multiple psychosocial hazards: traumatic materials, role conflict, excessive workloads, poor workplace relationships, and inappropriate behaviours. Workers made repeated complaints about bullying, verbal abuse, intimidation, and favouritism. Many took extended leave. In September 2018, the Court's principal in-house lawyer took her own life following a period where she had been required to perform three roles simultaneously and work long hours daily.

The failing: CSV admitted it had not conducted any adequate process to identify or assess psychosocial risks. Despite visible signs of distress and an excessive workload, no risk assessment was conducted and no control measures were implemented. Managers failed to treat the situation as a workplace hazard requiring intervention.

The outcome: CSV pleaded guilty to breaching section 21(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic) and was fined $379,157, the maximum penalty available. The Court found the offending was at the highest end of seriousness.

The lesson: Having policies is not enough. CSV likely had documentation about workplace wellbeing. What it lacked was any systematic process to identify hazards, assess risks, and implement controls. The prosecution succeeded because WorkSafe could demonstrate a complete absence of risk management, not merely a deficiency in it.

The Withdrawn Prosecutions: Testing Evidentiary Boundaries

Two high-profile prosecutions were withdrawn in 2025, revealing the difficulty regulators face in proving psychosocial hazard breaches.

SafeWork NSW v Western Sydney Local Health District

This prosecution, commenced in 2022, alleged that WSLHD failed to manage psychosocial risks during the handling of workplace complaints and grievances. Two nurses had been subject to a clinical review investigation following an incident involving a mental health patient. Both nurses passed away in the months following the investigation.

SafeWork alleged WSLHD had failed to apply its own policies during the investigation, thereby exposing the nurses to psychosocial hazards. The prosecution centred on the concept of "poor organisational justice" as a hazard requiring management.

After three weeks of hearings and 20 witnesses, SafeWork withdrew the prosecution in March 2025. The withdrawal followed WSLHD successfully objecting to expert evidence regarding the alleged risk.

The significance: The District Court's preliminary findings before withdrawal were instructive. The Court found that workplace investigations and disciplinary processes can constitute psychosocial hazards giving rise to harm risk. It also ruled that employees' subjective statements about feeling stressed were relevant evidence in assessing whether the employer breached its duty. However, the Court acknowledged that these processes are inherently stressful. Causing stress through a legitimate process is not automatically a breach of the WHS Act.

The lesson: Policies matter. WSLHD had policies to manage psychosocial hazards associated with disciplinary processes. The allegation was not that policies were absent, but that they were not followed. Organisations with robust, documented procedures are better positioned to defend regulatory action, even when outcomes are tragic.

WorkSafe WA v Department of Justice

In late 2024, WorkSafe WA commenced its first prosecution for psychosocial hazards under the Work Health and Safety Act 2020 (WA). The Department of Justice was charged with failing to provide and maintain a safe work environment at Bunbury Regional Prison.

The allegations were serious. WorkSafe claimed staff were repeatedly exposed to sexual harassment, bullying, intimidation, and threats. An improvement notice had been issued in March 2023 requiring the Department to implement procedures for managing inappropriate workplace behaviours. According to WorkSafe, the Department failed to comply even after being granted an extension.

The charges were Category 1 offences carrying a maximum penalty of $3.5 million. This reflected the regulator's view that psychosocial hazard failures warrant the same gravity as serious physical safety breaches.

However, WorkSafe withdrew the prosecution in September 2025, citing "fresh evidence" obtained during proceedings. The regulator noted the Department had improved its management of psychosocial hazards in recent years.

The lesson: Demonstrated improvement matters. The withdrawal suggests regulators may prefer practical remediation over courtroom victories. Organisations that can show genuine, documented progress in hazard management may secure more favourable outcomes than those that simply contest allegations.

Enforcement Without Prosecution: The UTS Prohibition Notice

Perhaps the most dramatic regulatory intervention of 2025 did not involve a prosecution at all. In September 2025, SafeWork NSW issued a prohibition notice to the University of Technology Sydney, halting a planned restructure that could have resulted in 150 job losses.

What happened: UTS had scheduled meetings with approximately 800 staff to discuss an "academic change proposal" as part of a $100 million cost-reduction program. The meetings were arranged with just one day's notice. SafeWork issued the notice on the grounds that workers "are and will be exposed to a serious and imminent risk of psychological harm" from the way the process was being managed.

The prohibition notice ordered UTS to cancel the meetings, halt release of the change proposal, and demonstrate that psychosocial risks had been adequately managed before proceeding. It threatened a $663,080 fine for non-compliance.

The resolution: The notice was lifted after UTS met with SafeWork and agreed to extend consultation timelines and modify its communication approach. The university committed to giving affected staff more notice before meetings where they might learn of redundancy.

The significance: This was reportedly the first time a safety regulator had issued a prohibition notice to halt a white-collar redundancy process. It demonstrates that regulators now view HR processes, including restructures and redundancies, as potential sources of psychosocial harm requiring active management.

The cost: Analysis suggests the pause cost UTS between $3 to $4 million per month when accounting for frozen payroll, consultant and legal fees, and delayed savings. Even without a prosecution, regulatory intervention carries substantial financial consequences.

The lesson: Process matters as much as outcome. The issue was not whether UTS could conduct redundancies, but how it was doing so. Consultation timelines, notice periods, and communication approaches are now squarely within regulatory scope.

The Enforceable Undertaking: Fortescue and Sexual Harassment

Not all enforcement results in prosecution. In December 2023, WorkSafe WA accepted an enforceable undertaking from Fortescue, dropping charges related to 34 counts of failing to provide documents about alleged sexual harassment at mine sites.

The context: WorkSafe had charged Fortescue with refusing to supply documents relating to sexual harassment allegations at its Christmas Creek, Solomon, and Cloudbreak operations. The investigation followed the "Enough is Enough" Parliamentary Inquiry into sexual harassment in the mining industry.

The undertaking: Fortescue committed to spending $1.47 million on industry-wide initiatives, including developing a security and duress app for mining workers, contractor education programs, and research into psychosocial hazard prevention strategies. These resources must be made available across the mining industry, not just within Fortescue.

The lesson: Enforceable undertakings can deliver broader outcomes than prosecutions. Rather than securing a fine that would have been paid to the state, WorkSafe obtained investment in sector-wide improvements. Organisations facing enforcement action may find value in proposing undertakings that address systemic issues.

The High Court Precedent: Elisha v Vision Australia (2024)

While not a safety prosecution, the High Court's December 2024 decision in Elisha v Vision Australia fundamentally changed the landscape for psychiatric injury claims arising from employment.

The facts: Mr Elisha was terminated for alleged misconduct following an incident at a hotel during a work trip. The termination followed a disciplinary process the trial judge described as "unfair, unjust and wholly unreasonable" and "nothing short of a sham and a disgrace." Vision Australia had relied on allegations about Mr Elisha's "pattern of aggression" that were never put to him during the process.

Following termination, Mr Elisha experienced significant psychological harm that left him unable to work.

The ruling: The High Court awarded $1.44 million in damages for psychiatric injury flowing from breach of the employment contract. This overturned 115 years of precedent that had largely precluded such claims.

The Court found that Vision Australia's disciplinary procedure was incorporated into the employment contract and that the failure to follow it constituted a breach. Critically, the Court held that psychological harm was a foreseeable consequence of such a breach, noting that employment "is usually one of the most important things in [a person's] life. It gives not only a livelihood but an occupation, an identity and a sense of self-esteem."

The significance for WHS: This decision operates in parallel with WHS obligations. Organisations now face exposure from two directions: regulatory prosecution under safety legislation, and civil claims for contractual breach resulting in psychological harm. Disciplinary and termination processes that fail to follow documented procedures create risk on both fronts.

The lesson: Your policies may be binding contracts. If your employment contracts reference compliance with policies and procedures, those policies may be contractually enforceable. Failing to follow them in termination processes can result in substantial damages.

The Regulatory Infrastructure Builds

Beyond individual enforcement actions, regulators have been building capacity for sustained psychosocial hazard enforcement.

SafeWork NSW: In February 2024, SafeWork announced increased enforcement activities targeting psychosocial hazards. Its 2024-2026 Psychological Health and Safety Strategy commits to conducting "psychosocial WHS checks" at workplaces with 200 or more employees.

In July 2025, SafeWork issued over 500 non-compliance notices during a compliance blitz targeting high-risk industries, with psychosocial hazards among the five priority areas. A subsequent November blitz resulted in over 700 notices, including 228 psychosocial checks.

SafeWork now operates as a standalone regulator with a dedicated Commissioner and must report to the Minister every six months on psychosocial hazard complaints and notices.

WorkSafe Victoria: Victoria's Occupational Health and Safety (Psychological Health) Regulations 2025 took effect on 1 December 2025. WorkSafe established a specialist Psychosocial Inspectorate and has published a Compliance Code providing hazard-by-hazard guidance on control measures.

WorkSafe responded to over 7,100 inquiries about psychosocial hazards in 2024-25. Psychological injury claims represent 17 to 18% of all workplace injury claims in Victoria.

National coordination: The Commonwealth's Work Health and Safety (Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work) Code of Practice 2024 provides a national framework that state regulators are increasingly aligning with.

What the Case Law Reveals

Reviewing these enforcement actions reveals consistent themes about what regulators expect and what courts will accept.

Systematic processes are essential. The CSV conviction succeeded because there was no evidence of any hazard identification or risk assessment process. Organisations with documented, implemented systems are better positioned to defend regulatory action.

Policies must be followed. Both the WSLHD and Elisha cases turned on failures to follow existing policies. Having documentation that is not implemented creates liability, not protection.

Process design matters. The UTS prohibition notice was not about whether restructuring could occur, but about how it was communicated. Adequate notice, consultation, and support arrangements are now regulatory requirements.

Subjective experience is evidence. Courts accept that employees' statements about feeling stressed, anxious, or distressed are relevant to assessing whether psychosocial risks were adequately managed.

Improvement can influence outcomes. The WA Department of Justice prosecution was withdrawn after the Department demonstrated improved hazard management. Genuine remediation may result in more favourable outcomes than litigation.

HR processes are safety processes. Disciplinary investigations, performance management, redundancy consultations, and grievance handling are now explicitly recognised as potential sources of psychosocial harm requiring risk management.

Practical Implications

For organisations seeking to translate this case law into practice:

Audit your risk identification processes. Can you demonstrate a systematic approach to identifying psychosocial hazards? If audited tomorrow, could you produce evidence of hazard assessments conducted across your operations?

Review your policy implementation. It is not enough to have policies. You need evidence they are being followed, including training records, documented decisions, and supervisor sign-offs.

Assess your change management approach. If you are planning restructures, redundancies, or significant operational changes, have you conducted a psychosocial risk assessment? Can you demonstrate adequate consultation and notice periods?

Examine your investigation processes. When conducting workplace investigations, are you following your documented procedures? Are you applying procedural fairness? Are you monitoring the wellbeing of participants?

Document everything. In every case examined, the outcome turned partly on what could be demonstrated with evidence. Contemporaneous documentation of decisions, actions, and reasoning provides the foundation for any defence.

Looking Forward

The withdrawn prosecutions in NSW and WA should not be interpreted as regulatory retreat. Both regulators have indicated they will continue to pursue psychosocial hazard enforcement. SafeWork NSW has explicitly stated it anticipates future prosecutions in this space.

With Victoria's new regulations now in effect and NSW, Queensland, and other jurisdictions continuing to strengthen their frameworks, the trajectory is clear. Psychosocial hazards are receiving the same regulatory treatment as physical hazards. Organisations that fail to implement systematic controls will face enforcement action.

The question is no longer whether regulators will act, but whether your organisation will be ready when they do.

Key Sources and Further Reading

• Court Services Victoria conviction (WorkSafe Victoria, October 2023)

• SafeWork NSW v Western Sydney Local Health District (Ashurst, March 2025)

• WorkSafe WA v Department of Justice (WorkSafe WA, September 2025)

• UTS prohibition notice (Pinsent Masons, September 2025)

• Elisha v Vision Australia (Kennedys, March 2025)

• Fortescue enforceable undertaking (WorkSafe WA, December 2023)

• Victoria's Psychological Health Regulations 2025 (MinterEllison, October 2025)

• SafeWork NSW Psychological Health and Safety Strategy 2024-2026 (Holding Redlich, May 2024)

This article is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Organisations should seek specific advice regarding their compliance obligations.