Western Australian Consolidated Acts Western Australian Consolidated Acts (1) Subject to
subsection (3), in a prosecution under this Part for an offence against
this Act it is a defence if the accused establishes —
(a) that
the contravention in respect of which the proceeding was instituted was due to
reasonable mistake;
(b) that
the contravention in respect of which the proceeding was instituted was due to
reasonable reliance on information supplied by another person; or
(c)
that —
(i)
the contravention in respect of which the proceeding was
instituted was due to the Act or default of another person, to an
accident or to some other cause beyond the accused’s control; and
(ii)
the accused took reasonable precautions and could not by
the exercise of due diligence have prevented the commission of the offence.
(2) In
subsection (1)(b) and (c), another person does not include a person who
was —
(a) an
employee or agent of the accused; or
(b) in
the case of an accused being a body corporate, a director, employee or agent
of the accused,
at the time when the
contravention occurred.
(3) If a defence
provided by subsection (1) involves an allegation that a contravention
was due to reliance on information supplied by another person or to the
Act or default of another person, the accused is not, without leave of
the court, entitled to rely on that defence unless the accused has, not later
than 7 days before the day on which the hearing of the proceeding
commences, served on the person by whom the proceeding was instituted a notice
in writing giving such information that would identify or assist in the
identification of the other person as was then in the accused’s
possession.
(4) In a proceeding
under this Part in relation to a contravention of this Act committed by
the publication of an advertisement, it is a defence if it is established that
the accused is a person whose business it is to publish or arrange for the
publication of advertisements and that the accused received the advertisement
for publication in the ordinary course of business and did not know and had no
reason to suspect that its publication would amount to a contravention of this
Act.
(5) In a proceeding
under this Part in relation to a contravention of this Act committed by
the supplying of goods that did not comply with a product quality standard, a
product safety standard or a packaging standard, or in relation to which the
supplier did not comply with a product information standard, it is a defence
if the accused establishes —
(a) that
the goods were acquired by him for the purpose of re-supply and were so
acquired from a person who carried on in Australia a business of supplying
such goods otherwise than as the agent of a person outside Australia; and
(b) that
he did not know, and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained,
that the goods did not comply with that standard or that he had not complied
with that standard in relation to the goods, as the case may be, or he relied
in good faith on a representation by the person from whom he acquired the
goods that a relevant standard of that kind had not been prescribed in respect
of the goods.
(6) A person is not,
without leave of the court, entitled to rely on the defence provided by
subsection (5) unless he has, not later than 7 days before the day
on which the hearing of the proceeding commences, served on the person by whom
the proceeding was instituted a notice in writing identifying the person from
whom he acquired the goods.
[Section 83 amended by No. 84 of 2004
s. 82.]