New amendments re: failure to stop and give assistance (1 Viewer)

L

LaraB

Guest
Something i got sent at work that may be of interest to you guys:

Crimes Amendment (Road Accidents) (Brendan’s Law) Act 2005

The Crimes Amendment (Road Accidents) (Brendan’s Law) Act 2005 will commence on 13 February 2006.

The object of the Crimes Amendment (Road Accidents) (Brendan’s Law) Act 2005 is to amend the Crimes Act 1900 and various other Acts with
respect to the obligations of drivers to stop and provide assistance where their
vehicles are involved in accidents that cause death or injury.

Specifically, the Act:

(a) inserts a new section 52AB into the Crimes Act 1900. The proposed
section makes it an offence for the driver of a vehicle that is involved in a collision
causing death or grievous bodily harm to fail to stop and give assistance in
circumstances in which he or she knows, or ought reasonably to know, that the
vehicle has been involved in such a collision. Where the collision causes death, the
maximum penalty for such a failure is imprisonment for 10 years. Where the
collision causes grievous bodily harm, the maximum penalty for such a failure is
imprisonment for 7 years;

(b) amends the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 so as to provide that an
offence against proposed section 52AB of the Crimes Act 1900 will be dealt with
summarily unless the prosecution or person charged elects for it to be dealt with on
indictment. If dealt with summarily, the maximum penalty that can be imposed for
such an offence will be imprisonment for 18 months;

(c) amends the Road Transport (General) Act 1999 so as to provide for the
disqualification of a person from holding a driver licence in circumstances in which
the person is convicted of an offence under proposed section 52AB of the Crimes Act
1900;

(d) amends the (uncommenced) Road Transport (General) Act 2005 so as
to provide for the disqualification of a person from holding a driver licence in
circumstances in which the person is convicted of an offence under proposed section
52AB of the Crimes Act 1900;

(e) substitutes section 70 of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic
Management) Act 1999. The proposed new section, which replaces an existing
section with respect to the giving of assistance at accidents involving death or injury,
is in similar terms to proposed section 52AB of the Crimes Act 1900, but is intended
to apply only where there is a collision where any injury appears to fall short of death
or grievous bodily harm. As with existing section 70, the maximum penalty for
failing to stop and give assistance is 30 penalty units or imprisonment for 18 months
or both (for a first offence) or 50 penalty units or imprisonment for 2 years or both
(for a second or subsequent offence).
 

hfis

Dyslexic Fish
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
876
Location
Not China
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
It'll be interesting to see how widely the courts interpret 'ought reasonably to know', as I imagine any cases that actually surface as a result of this legislation will hinge on that point alone.
 

Frigid

LLB (Hons)
Joined
Nov 17, 2002
Messages
6,208
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
LaraB said:
Specifically, the Act:

(a) inserts a new section 52AB into the Crimes Act 1900. The proposed
section makes it an offence for the driver of a vehicle that is involved in a collision
causing death or grievous bodily harm to fail to stop and give assistance in
circumstances in which he or she knows, or ought reasonably to know, that the
vehicle has been involved in such a collision. Where the collision causes death, the
maximum penalty for such a failure is imprisonment for 10 years. Where the
collision causes grievous bodily harm, the maximum penalty for such a failure is
imprisonment for 7 years
in other words, this is similar to creating a 'duty of care' for homicide by criminal omission between a driver and the injured driver?

hmmm... i don't know... the criminal law has always been careful in creating such duties and making omission an offence (for example, the duty of care in homicide by omission is extremely limited to several categories)...

on the other hand, i can see its application to hit-and-run accidents; but wouldn't that be adequately covered by s52A dangerous drivinghttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/s52a.html occasioning GBH and death offences already? how would this new section help?

secondly, if i were the uninjured not-at-fault driver, would not this new section impose a positive duty on myself to check on the injured at-fault driver? how is the lack of care in this case criminal?

i am wary of omission-type duties.
 
Last edited:

Rorix

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,818
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
MoonlightSonata said:
Think of all those potential Dr Cherrys...

ahahaha


fuck, I just laughed at legal humour:(.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top