Home → Results → Heavy Vehicle Operators
Heavy Vehicle Operators
Case outcomes depend on the individual facts and circumstances of each matter. Past results do not guarantee or predict future outcomes.
$18,000 Fine Reduced After Annulment Application
Faced up to $82,500Annulment granted — fine reduced to $3,000
| Court | Parramatta Local Court |
|---|---|
| Date | August 2026 |
| Client type | Company – General freight |
| Charges | 2 × Failing to comply with a notice to provide information Annulment application concerning orders made in the client’s absence |
| Maximum penalty | $41,250 for each offence Total maximum exposure: $82,500 |
Result
ANNULMENT GRANTED — FINE REDUCED TO $3,000
The client missed its first court date in May 2026 and was fined $18,000 in its absence. The company had attempted to comply with the notices, but an administrative error resulted in its response not being received.
The Court granted the annulment application, reopening the matters. The fine was reduced to $3,000 for both offences, with prosecution costs of $234.
The application was supported by evidence of the company’s attempts to comply and was not opposed by the prosecutor.
Vehicle Registration Suspension Application Not Pursued
Faced up to $165,000$3,000 per offence — suspension application not pursued
| Court | Parramatta Local Court |
|---|---|
| Date | July 2026 |
| Client type | Company – General and oversize freight |
| Charges | 4 × Failing to comply with a notice to provide information Application to suspend vehicle registrations under s 598 of the Heavy Vehicle National Law |
| Maximum penalty | $41,250 for each offence Total maximum exposure: $165,000 |
Result
$3,000 PER OFFENCE — SUSPENSION APPLICATION NOT PURSUED
Due to extenuating personal circumstances, the company director did not receive the notices in time to comply. The company also had a history of nine penalty notices for the same type of offence.
The NHVR accepted our representations and did not proceed with the application to suspend the company’s vehicle registrations.
The Court imposed fines of $3,000 for each offence, together with prosecution costs of $468. Evidence was presented showing that the company had changed its business processes to improve its response to future NHVR notices.
Severe Dimension Charge Withdrawn
Faced up to $68,650Charge withdrawn — no prosecution costs
| Court | Nowra Local Court |
|---|---|
| Date | July 2026 |
| Client type | Company – General freight |
| Charges | Permitting another person to drive a heavy vehicle that did not comply with a dimension requirement – Severe Risk Breach |
| Maximum penalty | $68,650 |
Result
CHARGE WITHDRAWN — NO PROSECUTION COSTS
The handle of a curtain ratchet came loose and was protruding when the vehicle entered an NHVR safety station near Nowra.
We negotiated with the NHVR before the first court mention and demonstrated that the client had evidence supporting a strong reasonable excuse defence.
The prosecution withdrew the charge before the first court date, and no prosecution costs were ordered.
Failure to Comply With NHVR Notice
Faced up to $41,250$1,000 fine
| Court | Sutherland Local Court |
|---|---|
| Date | June 2026 |
| Client type | Company – Electrical services business using heavy vehicles to transport plant equipment |
| Charges | 1 × Failing to comply with a notice to provide information |
| Maximum penalty | $41,250 |
Result
$1,000 FINE
The client was a small electrical services business rather than a traditional freight operator. It had not previously dealt with the NHVR and was unaware of its obligations under the Heavy Vehicle National Law. The director was responsible for the company’s administration.
This was the company’s first court matter. Evidence was presented showing that it had taken steps to improve how it would respond to future notices.
The Court imposed a $1,000 fine, together with prosecution costs of $117.
Multiple Overmass Charges
Faced up to $200,950$12,000 in fines
| Court | Liverpool Local Court |
|---|---|
| Date | December 2025 |
| Charges | 3 × Permitting the use of a heavy vehicle that did not comply with a mass requirement – Substantial Risk Breach 1 × Permitting the use of a heavy vehicle that did not comply with a mass requirement – Severe Risk Breach |
| Maximum penalty | $41,250 for each substantial risk offence $77,200 for the severe risk offence Total maximum exposure: $200,950 |
Result
$12,000 IN FINES
A corporate transport client faced four overmass charges under the Heavy Vehicle National Law, including three substantial risk breaches and one severe risk breach.
Despite a total maximum penalty exposure of $200,950, the matter was finalised with fines of $3,000 for each offence, resulting in a total of $12,000.
Severe Overmass Charge
Faced up to $75,100$7,500 fine
| Court | Parramatta Local Court |
|---|---|
| Date | November 2025 |
| Charges | Permitting the use of a heavy vehicle that did not comply with a mass requirement – Severe Risk Breach |
| Maximum penalty | $75,100 |
Result
$7,500 FINE
A corporate transport client was prosecuted for a severe overmass offence under the Heavy Vehicle National Law.
Despite facing a maximum penalty of $75,100, the matter was finalised with a $7,500 fine.
Heavy Vehicle Defence Lawyer
Get clear advice before responding to the NHVR or attending Court.