Road rules and other than public roads

Does any reader of aus.motorcycles have the legal knowledge to say if the
road rules apply to shopping centre car parks, sporting ground car parks,
within service station boundaries and so on?

If a collision occurs between two vehicles in a car park or a service
station, are the police involved if:

- the collision results in minor property damage only,

- the collision results in some level of property damage and personal injury
requiring minor first aid only,

- the collision results in some level of property damage and personal injury
requiring hospitalisation for more than 24 hours.

- the collision results in some level of property damage and personal injury
requiring hospitalisation for more than seven days.

 

Normally a shopping centre park is considered subject to normal rules I
am told , access to public means road rules

 

from
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/viewtop/inforce/subordleg+179+2008+fn+0+N
specifically note2 - Seems petrol stations may infact be "road rule"
enforced as it is a "road related area"



Road Rules 2008
Current version for 1 June 2009 to date (accessed 4 August 2009 at 12:23)
Part 7Division 3


Division 3 Entering or leaving road related areas and adjacent land

74 Giving way when entering a road from a road related area or adjacent
land

(1) A driver entering a road from a road related area, or adjacent
land, without traffic lights or a stop sign, stop line, give way sign or
give way line must give way to:

(a) any vehicle travelling on the road or turning into the road
(except a vehicle turning right into the road from a road related area or
adjacent land), and

(b) any pedestrian on the road, and

(c) any vehicle or pedestrian on any road related area that the
driver crosses to enter the road, and

(d) for a driver entering the road from a road related area:

(i) any pedestrian on the road related area, and

(ii) any other vehicle ahead of the driver's vehicle or
approaching from the left or right.

Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.

Note 1. Adjacent land, give way line, stop line and traffic
lights are defined in the Dictionary, and road related area is defined in
rule 13.

Note 2. Adjacent land or a road related area can include a
driveway, service station or shopping centre-see the definitions of adjacent
land and road related area. Some shopping centres may include roads-see the
definition of road in rule 12.

 

This sounds like a Traffic Law 101 assignment.

 

In NSW these are 'road related areas' and yes the road rules apply

Some of your examples appear to be related to civil damages which is
something else entirely (less restrictions).

 

(Disclaimer here). No legals, just what I read in the ARR and general
knowledge I've picked up in random spots along the way.

Generally, if it is NOT a public road, the "normal" road rules do not apply,
but in many circumstances, there are "as public" areas where *some* rules
apply - such as parking stations, where it's private property, (where anything
goes) but some rules apply regardless.

Thing like speeding, wrong side of the road, parking over allocated time etc
do not apply (and one cannot be "fined" for that), though the owners of
private land have every right to ask you to leave for being an arsehole, and
have other rights if you choose not to leave when you had the chance...

(snip)

This is a different story. Property damage is not strictly a road rules
issue, and is covered by other laws that apply everywhere. Much like if I
were to go to your place and break every vase I see, you can sue me. Damage
involving vehicles are in the same boat, even if they did occur on private
property.

In other words, what goes on public streets with cars regarding damage, is
the same on private land.

That said, (your options didn't imply it), coppers appear to be MUCH more
concerned about OTHER property damage NOT including the vehicles in question.
That is, if two Bentleys had a bingle totalling each other, as long as no
other third party damage occurred, they couldn't care less.
If this were on a public road, they might make a determination of fault
based on circumstances and/or admissions, but on private, it's up to the
persons involved to sort it out amongst themselves (or court).

As far as injury goes, if any injury occurred at all is a factor, rather
than severity. Even death apparently.

 

If the place is open for business, the carpark is regarded as a public
thoroughfare.

 

Yes, I've heard that definition before too.

I've also heard of people behind latched but not locked gates who've
disagreed with them.

I'm not at all sure who won though...


G-S

 

From what I was told Doug, it doesn't matter if it open for business or not

 

If the owner says it is private property then I don't believe you need
a gate.

Don't forget that the 'road reserve', the area between the edge of the
road and the property boundary, is also a 'road related area'.

Nothing matters except what the court says and it will cost you to go
to court.

 

The police are involved if someone calls them, or if they drive past
and observe and choose to stop and investigate. The laws between
states differ on when the police "have to" be involved. For instance
in some states if there is more than a certain dollar amount of damage
caused the police need to be notified, whereas in Victoria in the case
of a traffic accident the police only "have to" be involved if a
person is injured, or if there is damage to property owned by someone
who is not in attendance.

On the matter of whether traffic matters which occur on private
property are police matters or not, I'm not sure if there's a hard and
fast rule which applies to all circumstances.. see the comments others
wrote about locked gates. Not sure if its just in Victoria, but I
have read that if you're driving on a privately owned road on a
privately owned property, a farm track for instance, speed limits and
other road rules do not apply, however, you can still be charged for
drink driving in that circumstance.

A google search came up with this website regarding Victorian law.
http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/your.rights.html

 

It's my understanding that there have been a few cases around that exact
issue, where people were on private property and behind closed (but not
locked) gates.

There are some farmers I know who now keep gates locked because of this
which has other drawbacks.


G-S

 

A few years ago when I was a CFA volunteer
Not that far from you Geoff
we were called out to a fire,
I was driving the truck with the Captain in with me,
we got to the farm where the fire was in one of the back paddocks,
when we got to the gate, it was chained and padlocked
we didn't have the boltcutters with us as they were not standard equipment,
The farmers gates and fences were of a very sturdy build,
unusual for the standard farm fences and gates,
so it meant that we couldn't drive through the fence or crash the gate down
as the old Austin wasn't that powerful
so, the Captain just said,
"Let the fucking paddock burn, if he locks the gate"
So, as he was the Captain, we did as he said.
The farmer tried to raise all the trouble he could about claiming that we
wouldn't even try to put the fire out,
but when it was revealed to the rest of the town that his gate was locked
and impossible to get in with the old Austin,
he shut up his whinging

 

Which is one of the reasons I don't approve of locked farm gates, ambo's
would be another but there are more mundane reasons as well.

I still think it's unwarranted that roads on any private property (even
those behind a clearly marked private property with do not tresspass
sign) are regarded as being a continuation of a public road where public
road rules apply if that gate isn't locked.

But hey... what's logic ever had to do with the law.


G-S

 

And of coarse Geoff, being from the rural area, you would know that in
between a lot of paddocks, there is a public road.
A lot of people do not know this as they see a fence or gate with a chain on
it and a "keep out" sign on it and think it is private land.
But, the laneways, about 50 feet wide, are supposed to be accessible to the
public, but the farmers put a gate, either a cyclone type or a post and wire
fence across the laneway, then conveniently, knock their own fence down to
allow their animlas to graze in this public land for free, then, after a
certain time, they claim that the laneway is not being used by the public,
then use adverse possession laws to acquire the laneway, giving the farmer
all this extra land.
Of coarse, you have no recourse to object to this adverse possession, as the
farmer or the claimant, has got a short 21 days for any objection against
his claim and as most of these laneways are a fair way from civilization,
no-one sees the notice, then the result is, the farmers have acquired
probably millions of acres of public land for free.
Given that there might be 40 to 50 acres in one of these laneways and maybe
5 of these laneways every square mile = 200 acres every square mile
lots of square miles in OZ.
A lot of farmers think that is their god given right to do as they please
with surrounding land if it is owned by the Government.
Makes me wonder how many acres of these super-huge farms were acquired
legally?
Where I am, there are large farms of 4000 to 5000 acres and the farmer runs
a flock of 30 to 50 sheep and crying poor

 

While I was in the UK, Jeffles took me for a tour up through some of
the remote moorlands of NW of Blighty. I wasn't aware of the law of
right of access that exists in the UK (and I assume what is being
referred to here and not something I was aware of either). Anyway, he
turns down this farm driveway, drives past a beautiful old traditional
British old farm cottage style house and then pulls up at a farm gate
and we drive up through some paddocks to get from one motorway to
another. I thought at first he must have known the owner of the
property but no, it's just taken for granted. It still felt weird to
me, like we were trespassing.

 

Yes, Kevin.
The farmer in England has to, by law, allow access to any ancient walking
path to anyone and the poms, by nature, are ignorant bastards, if any
farmer unknowingly erects a building, shed or fence on that ancient pathway,
they will not go around it, they insist on their ancestral rights of going
in a straight line.

The general public here do not know the rules, therefore, the farmer gets
away with a lot, including the land.
As with adverse possession, the land then becomes the property of the
farmer,
whereas in England, it always remains the property of the Duchy

 

At one point I worked for Crown Lands and Survey (which has been
swallowed by a larger department and then that department swallowed by
one even larger which then changed names a few times).

During my time there I dealt with a great number of 'unused roads' and
'grazing licenses' which are now called I think 'agricultural permits'
and I assure you that not many of the farmers got away with it (not a
high % in comparison to the total number existing).

In fact one block we own has an attached agricultural permit for a strip
of land (which costs us $100 per year... it's not very big).


G-S

 

Yeah it felt weird though. Not to mention trying to negotiate this
ageing Escort up the muddy dirt track we were on.

 

So you had a modern type car then?
for that region anyway.......................