Consumer Goods (Projectile Toys) Safety Standard 2020

Projectile toy. The central regulated item is defined in section 5 as a product supplied new that (a) is designed or clearly intended for use in play by a child under 14 years of age, and (b) is capable of launching a projectile. The phrase "clearly intended" imports an objective test based on the product's design, marketing, and packaging; it is not limited to toys bearing a label "for children under 14". The limitation to "supplied new" excludes second-hand goods, but note that the ACL's definition of "supply" includes sale, exchange, hire, lease, and other commercial transactions, so the standard covers new toys in retail, online, promotional giveaways, and other commercial channels. The toy need not be a "toy" in the ordinary sense if it is capable of launching a projectile and is clearly intended for child play. This captures items such as toy bows and arrows, soft dart blasters, foam projectile launchers, and possibly some novelty items. It excludes items intended for adult use (e.g., airsoft guns clearly marketed to adults), but the line may be blurry and ultimately depends on the objective "clearly intended" test.

Transitional period. Defined as 24 months beginning on commencement. During that period, suppliers may choose between the old 2010 standard and the new Part 3 requirements. The old standard is not reproduced in this instrument; it must be consulted separately on the Federal Register of Legislation. At the end of the transitional period, section 6 is automatically repealed, and only Part 3 compliance is permitted. This is a common transitional mechanism that gives industry time to adjust production, testing, and labelling.

Alternative compliance pathways. Part 3, section 8 sets out four options: (i) compliance with the Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS ISO 8124.1:2019 (as modified); (ii) compliance with the European Standard EN 71-1:2014+A1:2018 (as modified); (iii) compliance with the International Standard ISO 8124-1:2018 (as modified); (iv) compliance with the US Standard ASTM F963-17. A supplier may choose any one. The instrument does not require consistency across a product range; a supplier could, in theory, use different standards for different models. However, the regulator may request the supplier to nominate which standard has been applied: see section 108 of the ACL, which is cross-referenced in a note to section 8.

Modifications to the standards. The instrument does not incorporate the full text of the external standards; it incorporates specific clauses and modifies them by omitting certain sub-clauses. These modifications are critical because they remove requirements that the original standards contained. For example, clause 4.18 of the Australian/New Zealand Standard and the International Standard originally required that certain projectile toys be accompanied by instructions for use regarding safe use, and that the first paragraph of clause 4.18.4 (which likely contained a further instruction requirement) be omitted. Similarly, clause 4.19.1 (remote-controlled flying toys) originally required instructions; that requirement is removed. For the European Standard, paragraphs 4.17.3.1(b) and 4.17.4.2(d) are omitted , likely provisions requiring instructions or other content. These omissions reduce the compliance burden significantly: a projectile toy that would otherwise need instructions to meet the standard may now be supplied without those instructions if it meets the remaining mechanical and physical safety requirements.

Warning requirement. Section 13 imposes an additional, independent requirement. It applies only if all three conditions are satisfied: the toy could reasonably be aimed at the eyes or face; it can launch a projectile more than 300 mm; and the kinetic energy exceeds 0.08 J. The kinetic energy threshold is very low; 0.08 J is about the kinetic energy of a pea dropped from a short height, so many light projectile toys will exceed it. The requirement is to have a warning statement in English on the instructions or packaging, clearly legible and visible, stating "WARNING: Do not aim at eyes or face" or words to that effect. The supplier must determine range and kinetic energy using the standard that the supplier intends to comply with (section 13(3)). This means a supplier using the US Standard may test using ASTM methods; a supplier using the International Standard may use ISO methods. The methods may produce different results, so a toy that triggers the warning under one standard may not trigger it under another.

Relationship between Part 3 and the warning. A projectile toy must meet both the chosen standard and the warning requirement. There is no exemption from the warning for toys that meet a standard , the warning is additional. Conversely, a toy that does not meet the trigger conditions for the warning need not bear it, even if it is projectile toy otherwise.

Suppliers. The primary duty holders are persons or entities who supply projectile toys in trade or commerce. This includes manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers. Because the standard applies to "supplied new", it covers every link in the commercial chain after manufacture; a retailer selling a non-compliant toy will be liable even if they bought it from an importer who assured compliance. The standard does not apply to private individuals selling second-hand toys at a garage sale or online marketplace as a one-off, because that is not "supplied new" and may not be in trade or commerce. However, a business that buys and resells used toys may still be subject to the ACL's general safety provisions, though not to this specific standard.

Children under 14. The definition of projectile toy is anchored to use in play by a child under 14. So the standard is designed to protect that age group. Older children and adults may use the same products, but the regulatory purpose is child safety. The standard does not ban adult projectile products; it only regulates those that are designed or clearly intended for child play. This creates a possible gap: a product that is sold as an "adult toy" (in the ammunition sense) but is objectively attractive to children may fall outside the definition if it is not clearly intended for children. That is a design and marketing choice for the supplier, but it carries risk of regulatory challenge if enforcement authorities take a different view of "clearly intended".

Regulators. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and state/territory fair trading agencies enforce the standard. They can issue infringement notices, seek injunctions, initiate recall orders, and pursue penalties under the ACL. The ACCC also has the power to request a supplier to nominate which standard they have relied on, as noted in section 8.

Testing laboratories and certifiers. The standard implicitly requires testing against one of the four external standards. Certification bodies and testing labs that specialise in toy safety will see demand for testing against AS/NZS ISO 8124.1, EN 71-1, ISO 8124-1, and ASTM F963, but only the specific clauses referenced. The modifications mean that labs must be aware that the instruction-related clauses are not required, so testing for those clauses is unnecessary.

Duty to supply only compliant toys. The key duty is that a supplier must not supply a projectile toy unless it complies with the applicable requirements. During the transitional period, compliance may be with either Part 3 or the old 2010 standard. After the transitional period, only Part 3. This duty is strict in the sense that it does not require fault; supplying a non-compliant toy is a breach even if the supplier took all reasonable care.

Right to choose among four standards. Suppliers have the right to select any of the four listed standards (with modifications) as the basis for compliance. This flexibility is unusual in Australian product safety standards, which typically mandate a single standard. The rationale, presumably, is to allow suppliers who already test against a common international standard to avoid duplicative testing. The choice is not irreversible; a supplier could change standards across different production batches, as long as each batch meets the chosen standard.

Right to omit instruction requirements for certain clauses. Because the instrument modifies the standards to omit instruction-related provisions, a supplier may supply a projectile toy that would otherwise need to include instructions under the original standard, without those instructions. This reduces the supplier's cost of compliance (no need to write, translate, or include instructions) and may reduce the risk of non-compliance from missing instructions.

Duty to provide warning when conditions are met. If the toy meets the three criteria in section 13(1), the supplier must ensure that the instructions or packaging carry the specified warning. The supplier must determine range and kinetic energy using the standard they intend to comply with. This means that a supplier must actually test (or have evidence) that the toy does or does not trigger the warning. It is not permissible to simply assume the toy is below the threshold without testing.

Right of regulator to request nomination. Under section 108 of the ACL, the regulator may require a supplier to nominate which of the section 8(a) requirements the toy complies with. This is an investigative power; it would typically be used when a toy is suspected of non-compliance. The supplier must be able to produce evidence (e.g., test reports) linking the toy to the nominated standard.

The instrument itself does not prescribe penalties; it is a safety standard made under the ACL. Contravening a safety standard is a breach of a civil penalty provision under section 106 of the ACL. For corporations, the maximum pecuniary penalty is the greater of $10 million, three times the value of the benefit obtained from the contravention, or 10% of annual turnover (if the court cannot determine the benefit). For individuals, the penalty is up to $500,000. Additionally, the court may make other orders such as a recall order, a community service order, an order to disclose information, or an order to redress loss or damage (sections 124-128 of the ACL). The ACCC can also issue infringement notices (a form of on-the-spot fine) for alleged contraventions; the amount for a listed corporation is currently $165,000 (as at 2023), and for a body corporate not listed it is $33,000. The ACCC can also seek injunctions to prevent further supply of non-compliant toys.

Enforcement and product recalls. The ACCC can issue a mandatory recall notice if it believes the toy is unsafe or does not comply with the standard (section 122 of the ACL). Suppliers may also voluntarily recall toys. Failure to comply with a recall notice is itself a contravention attracting penalties.

Risk categories. The standard is based on mechanical and physical hazards , projectiles that could cause eye or face injury. Enforcement is likely to concentrate on toys that pose the highest risk, such as high-velocity projectiles from blasters that lack energy-limiting design. The low threshold of 0.08 J for the warning requirement suggests that many toys will need warnings.

Defences. The ACL provides some defences, such as that the contravention was due to a reasonable mistake of fact or reliance on information from a third party, or that the person took reasonable precautions and exercised due diligence. However, these are defences to the penalty provisions, not automatic exemptions. The burden of proof lies on the defendant.

Australian Consumer Law. This instrument is made under subsection 104(1) of the ACL, which empowers the Minister to declare safety standards. As a declared safety standard, it has mandatory force. It operates alongside the ACL's general safety provisions: section 106 prohibits supply of goods that do not comply with a safety standard; section 106A deals with unsolicited consumer agreements; section 122 deals with recalls. The ACL also contains a prohibition on supplying goods with a safety defect (section 104 of the CCA? Actually, the ACL has Part 3-5 on product safety and Part 3-3 on safety standards). The standard does not replace the general law of negligence or the statutory consumer guarantees in the ACL (such as acceptable quality and fitness for purpose). A projectile toy that complies with this safety standard might still be defective if it causes injury, and the supplier could face liability under the ACL's manufacturer's liability provisions or tort law.

State and territory fair trading laws. Each state and territory applies the ACL as a law of its jurisdiction. The standard applies uniformly across Australia. Local enforcement agencies can take action.

Other product safety standards. There are separate mandatory standards for other toy categories, such as for children's toys containing lead, magnetic toys, and others. This standard is specific to projectile toys. A toy that is both a projectile toy and a magnetic toy would need to comply with both standards.

Trade marks and product liability. No specific interaction, but the standard does not require safety certification by a third party; suppliers can self-declare compliance. However, if a supplier relies on a test report from a lab, that does not insulate them from liability if the test was flawed.

International trade implications. The standard's incorporation of international standards (EN 71, ISO, ASTM) facilitates compliance for importers who already test to those standards. However, the modifications are specific to Australia, so a toy that meets the unmodified EN 71-1 might not meet the Australian standard if the omission of instructions changes the requirement. In practice, the modifications remove requirements, so compliance with the unmodified standard is stricter; but the Australian standard omits some clauses that the unmodified standard includes. This could create a situation where a toy that complies with the full EN 71-1 would also comply with the Australian standard (because the Australian standard does not require what EN 71-1 requires; it just omits those clauses). So there is no inconsistency. But a supplier cannot rely on the unmodified EN 71-1; they must ensure that the toy actually meets the Australian standard's version (which may be less demanding). This is a subtle point.

ACCC guidance. The regulator may issue guidelines or information on compliance. The instrument's notes suggest that copies of the standards can be viewed at ACCC offices subject to licensing conditions, which indicates limited public access to the incorporated standards due to copyright.

This instrument is a single, original instrument made under subsection 104(1) of the ACL. According to the source text provided, it has not been amended. The source text shows only the original instrument as made. It is likely that the instrument has not been amended since commencement, but the source text does not provide a history beyond the text itself. The instrument was made in 2020 and commenced on the day after registration (or a later date specified, but not given). The transitional period ends 24 months after commencement, which would have been in 2022-23. After that, the old standard is fully replaced. There is no indication of any proposed amendments.

The source text does not mention any litigation. Since the standard is a regulation rather than a statute, it is unlikely to be the subject of direct constitutional challenge. However, it could be challenged under administrative law if someone argued that the Minister lacked power to declare the standard, or that the standard is invalid due to incorporation of external standards without adequate public notice. There is no known litigation reported in the source. The standard has been in force for a few years; it is possible that there have been enforcement actions or infringement notices issued, but the source text does not discuss enforcement outcomes.

1. The warning requirement is triggered by objective capacity, not by the standard chosen. If a toy can launch a projectile more than 300 mm and over 0.08 J, the warning is required even if the toy does not need to bear a warning under the chosen standard. For example, the US standard ASTM F963-17 might have its own warning requirements, but the Australian standard's section 13 is additional and must be met regardless. Suppliers cannot rely on conformity with the foreign standard to avoid the warning.

2. The kinetic energy threshold is very low. 0.08 J is extremely small. Typical toy darts fired from a mass-market blaster can have kinetic energies around 0.5 to 2 J. Even very weak rubber band launchers may exceed 0.08 J. Therefore, almost any projectile toy that can be aimed at the face will require the warning. The practical effect is that nearly all projectile toys within the scope will need a warning. The only exceptions would be toys with very short range (under 300 mm) or extremely low energy (like a toy that launches a small foam ball a few centimetres with negligible force).

3. The definition of "projectile toy" is broad. It does not require that the projectile be a separate component; it says "capable of launching a projectile". This could include toys that fling or throw objects, such as catapults, slingshots, or even certain ball launchers. It might also include toys that launch projectiles via air pressure, springs, or elastic. The exemption for toys not "clearly intended" for children under 14 is a potential loophole, but it places the burden of proof on the supplier to show that the toy is not intended for children.

4. The modifications remove instruction requirements, but the supplier may still have a common law duty to warn. Under tort law, a manufacturer may be liable for failing to warn of known risks. Just because the mandatory standard does not require instructions does not mean a supplier is safe from negligence liability. A prudent supplier would still include warnings beyond the minimal "Do not aim at eyes or face" if the toy poses other risks.

5. The transitional period is short for some import cycles. 24 months seems generous, but for a supplier who designs and manufactures toy lines a year in advance, it may be tight. After the expiry, the old standard becomes completely invalid; any toy still in the supply chain that was manufactured under the old standard and not yet sold would be non-compliant. Suppliers must clear old stock before the cutoff.

6. The incorporated standards are frozen in time. The Australian/New Zealand Standard is "as in force or existing on 18 December 2020". The International Standard is as at 17 June 2020. The European and US Standards are as at commencement. This means that if these standards are later revised to tighten safety requirements, the Australian standard will not automatically update. A supplier could still comply with the older version, even if the new version is more protective. This is beneficial for stability but may create a safety gap over time. Conversely, a supplier who updates their production to a later version of EN 71-1 that is more stringent may need to check whether that later version still satisfies the Australian standard (which requires the 2014+A1:2018 version). If the later version is different, compliance with it might not guarantee compliance with the Australian standard because the clauses might have been renumbered or changed.

7. The "capable of launching a projectile more than 300 millimetres" condition. This seemingly simple metric may be difficult to measure precisely. The condition is objective, but testing to determine capacity may yield varied results depending on projectile weight, angle, and launch mechanism. The supplier must use the standard's methods (section 13(3)), but this is only for determining the trigger. There could be borderline cases where a toy barely exceeds 300 mm in some tests and falls short in others.

8. The standard does not require third-party certification. Self-declaration is permitted. However, in a dispute, the supplier will need to prove compliance. The cost of testing to four different standards may be high, but the supplier only needs to test against one chosen standard.

Step 1: Determine if the product is a projectile toy. Assess whether the product is supplied new, designed or clearly intended for play by a child under 14, and capable of launching a projectile. If yes, the standard applies.

Step 2: Choose a compliance pathway. Select one of the four standards listed in section 8(a). The choice will typically be based on the supplier's existing testing regime, target markets, or cost.

Step 3: Obtain the relevant standard. Purchase a copy from SAI Global or the ISO website, or view a copy at an ACCC office. Note that the standard is copyrighted; the ACCC can make a copy available for viewing subject to licensing conditions.

Step 4: Test the product. Engage a laboratory (or have in-house capability) to test against the specific clauses of the chosen standard as modified. For the Australian/New Zealand Standard, test against clause 4.18 (modified), 4.19.1 (modified), and 4.19.2. For European, test against 4.11(e) and 4.17 (modified). For International, test against 4.18 (modified), 4.19.1 (modified), and 4.19.2. For US, test against clause 4.21. Ensure that modifications (omissions) are applied, meaning that requirements for instructions are not tested or required.

Step 5: Determine whether the warning requirement applies. Use the chosen standard's methods to measure range and kinetic energy. If the toy can be aimed at the eyes/face, range > 300 mm, and kinetic energy > 0.08 J, then add the warning to either the instructions or the packaging. The warning must be in English, clearly legible and visible, and contain "WARNING: Do not aim at eyes or face" or similar.

Step 6: Maintain documentation. Keep records of the testing reports, the standard chosen, and the method used for energy/range determination. The regulator may request these under section 108 of the ACL. Without documentation, the supplier may not be able to demonstrate compliance.

Step 7: Check transitional period timing. If the toy is supplied during the transitional period, confirm that it complies with either the new standard or the old 2010 standard. If supplied after, only the new standard. Monitor the ACL for any amendment that might extend the transitional period (though none is indicated).

Step 8: Consider best practices beyond compliance. Even if the standard does not require instructions for some toys, consider adding warnings voluntarily (e.g., "Not suitable for children under 3" if small parts, or "Supervision recommended"). Also ensure compliance with other mandatory standards for toys (e.g., for lead, phthalates, electrical safety if applicable).

Step 9: Monitor for updates. The instrument may be amended in the future to refer to newer versions of the external standards. Subscribe to ACCC product safety updates.

Step 10: Prepare for enforcement. Understand the penalties. Conduct internal audits. If a toy is found non-compliant, immediately cease supply and consider voluntary recall to mitigate risk. Engage legal advice if necessary.