Bills

Civil Liability (Trespass) Amendment Bill

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for Consumer and Business Services, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (12:00): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Civil Liability Act 1936. Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for Consumer and Business Services, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (12:00): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Civil Liability (Trespass) Amendment Bill provides that no action for trespass arises when an officer serving a notice or a summons on behalf of the Crown trespasses in the course of serving the notice or summons. There is a range of government agencies that are required to service notices or summonses under various pieces of legislation. For those who wish to know more, I seek leave to insert the remainder of my second reading explanation into Hansard without my reading it.

Leave granted.

Where service is to be effected personally, an officer acting for or on behalf of the government agency will attend the property where the person to whom the summons or notice is addressed resides or works in order to serve the summons or notice. In many cases, this will involve entering the property, walking to the front door of the house, knocking on the door, asking for the relevant person and serving the relevant documents. Where there is no locked gate on a property or other contrary indication there is, at common law, an implied licence to enter a property that enables an officer to knock on the front door and serve a summons.

From time to time, in the context of notices or summonses being served, issues can arise with the law of trespass. This can occur where, for example, an occupier of property asserts that they had either expressly or impliedly revoked the implied licence to enter the property.

This Government considers that it is undesirable for taxpayer's money to be directed toward trespass claims that arise in the context of a notice or summons being served. The Bill amends the common law so that there is no action for trespass in those circumstances.

The Bill has been drafted so that it will operate in the least intrusive manner possible. It applies to authorised officers. It does not give those authorised officers broad power to enter land. Nor does it change the fact that a trespass has occurred. This is relevant to whether any information or evidence that may be obtained in the course of the trespass can subsequently be relied on in a Court. The Bill will not prevent an action for trespass where an authorised officer enters a home or residence. The Bill will also not apply to any actions of an authorised officer that go beyond serving the notice or summons.

The effect of the Bill is appropriately targeted and limited—namely that if an authorised officer trespasses on land in the context of serving a notice or summons, no action for trespass arises.

I commend the Bill to Members.

Explanation of Clauses

Part 1—Preliminary

1—Short title

2—Commencement

3—Amendment provisions

These clauses are formal.

Part 2—Amendment of Civil Liability Act 1936

4—Insertion of Part 9 Division 12B

This clause inserts Part 9 Division 12B into the principal Act.

Division 12B—Exclusion of liability for trespass—authorised officers

75B—Exclusion of liability for trespass—authorised officers

Proposed section 75B establishes that there will be no action for trespass arising by reason only of an authorised officer carrying out official duties to which the proposed subsection applies on another person's premises. The section sets out the nature and type of official duties that it is concerned with and it defines authorised officer and premises for the purposes of the provision.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Knoll.