Evidence (Prescribed Persons) Regulations 2005

The regulations use a small set of interlocking legal concepts to produce practical identity rules for the Evidence Act 1906:

• Prescription by regulation: The core device is prescription. Regulation 4(2) prescribes an office for the purposes of the Act's definition of "authorised officer"; Regulation 5 prescribes named persons as "forensic scientists" for the purposes of the Act. Both prescriptions are explicitly limited to "the purposes of the definition" in section 50B(1) of the Act. The instrument therefore operates as a statutory mapping rather than a substantive delegation of functions.

• Cross-referencing to the Act: The text repeatedly links the regulation's content back to s.50B(1) of the Evidence Act 1906. That cross-reference is the operative legal relationship: the regulations do not attempt to reproduce the Act's definition or to expand it; they place particular offices and employees within the scope of the Act's pre-existing definitional terms.

• Corporate identification by statutory order: Regulation 3 defines "PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA" by reference to a corporate name established by order under a separate statute, the Health Services Act 2016 s.32(1). The definition is self-contained in the regulations but depends on external administrative action (the order under the Health Services Act). The effect is that the prescribed office is an internal office of an entity that exists by statutory order.

• Named-person list: Regulation 5 contains a table of given names and family names of persons "employed in the Forensic Biology Department of PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA" and declares these persons to be "forensic scientists" for the Act's definitional purposes. The list is concrete and nominative; it is not framed as a class by role or qualification but by employment in a departmental unit and specific naming.

• Amendment mechanics: The compilation table and the marginal notes in the regulations show the amendment mechanism: the list and the PathWest definition have been inserted and amended by subsequent "SL" instruments and Gazette notices, and commencement is tied to Gazette publication or other triggering events. The instrument therefore relies on the subordinate legislation machinery to remain up to date.

Each main concept is confined to identification and prescription. The regulations do not create or spell out the substantive powers, evidentiary presumptions, qualifications or duties that might attach to the terms "authorised officer" or "forensic scientist" under the Act; they fix who and what are to be treated as those categories for the Act's purposes.

The regulations reach a narrow set of actors by attaching them to the Act's definitions. The affected parties fall into three groups.

• Prescribed office and named individuals. The most direct effects fall on the office of the chief pathologist in PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA (Reg 4(2)) and the specific employees named in Regulation 5. Those are the persons who are, by operation of the regulations, to be treated as an "authorised officer" (in the case of the office) and as "forensic scientists" (in the case of the named individuals) for the Act's definition in s.50B(1). The text states the persons are "employed in the Forensic Biology Department of PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA" and lists 19 named entries (Reg 5, Table).

• Users of the Evidence Act 1906. Because the regulations operate solely "for the purposes of the definition" in s.50B(1) of the Act, any legal processes, decision-makers or practitioners who operate under the Evidence Act will be affected to the extent those processes rely on the Act's definitions. That group includes courts, tribunal decision-makers, prosecutors, defence practitioners, expert witnesses and parties who must establish or challenge qualifications and status that depend on the Act's definitions. The instrument itself does not create new procedural roles; it supplies identity certainty to those who must apply the Act.

• PathWest and the Departmental Employer. The regulations implicate the employer, PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA, because the prescribed persons are identified by employment in the Forensic Biology Department. The corporate entity defined in Reg 3 is the organisational locus for the prescribed office and the named employees. Changes in personnel or departmental structures therefore interface with the regulations; the compilation notes and amendment history show the State updates the list through amending instruments.

Who decides is also visible: the regulations are subordinate legislation made and amended by the executive and published in the Gazette, as shown by the compilation table and the insertion/amendment notes (for example, SL 2022/204, SL 2023/163, SL 2025/77). Therefore the executive controls the list by regulation and the timing of changes is determined by the statutory instrument process and Gazette publication.

The immediate behavioural change the instrument enables is administrative and evidentiary: recipients of forensic reports, courts and practitioners can rely on an authoritative, public list when establishing that a particular person or office falls within the statutory terms of the Act. The list concentrates benefit on named individuals and the chief pathologist office by giving them a clear statutory identity for Act-related purposes. Conversely, parties who rely on forensic work from non-listed PathWest employees or other providers will not gain that prescribed status from these regulations.

The regulations are compact and do not themselves impose new duties or grant explicit rights. Their legal effect is to qualify who is to be treated as being within particular definitions of the Act, with the practical effect that duties, powers and evidentiary consequences attached by the Act to those definitions will run in favour of, or apply to, the prescribed office and persons. The instrument therefore operates as an enabling identification device; the concrete duties and rights remain those set out in the Act and any other law that uses its definitions.

What the regulations do state:

• Reg 4(2) prescribes the "office of the chief pathologist in PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA" "for the purposes of the definition of authorised officer in section 50B(1) of the Act". That prescription imports, for Act-related questions, the chief pathologist's office into the Act's authorised officer category. Any statutory duties or powers that the Act ties to the status "authorised officer" will therefore be exercisable by or attributable to that prescribed office, subject to the Act's language and limits.

• Reg 5 declares the named persons "employed in the Forensic Biology Department of PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA" to be "forensic scientists for the purposes of the definition of that term in section 50B(1) of the Act." The regulated effect is nominative: the named persons acquire the status identified by the Act's definition. Any rights (for example, the right to receive certain privileges under the Act, or to be treated as an expert) or duties (for example, obligations to comply with chain-of-custody or reporting standards where such duties are statutory) that the Act attaches to "forensic scientist" will apply to those named persons.

Because the regulations do not restate the Act's substantive content, practitioners must consult s.50B(1) and the rest of the Act to determine the exact contours of duties and rights that flow from the prescribed status. The regulations make no qualification in the text about temporary absence, acting appointments, secondments or changed employment status. The only employment condition stated is that the persons be "employed in the Forensic Biology Department of PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA" at the time of prescription.

Therefore, the practical implication for duties and rights is this: the State, by regulation, has single-sourced the identity of the Act's relevant forensic categories to a defined office and a concrete, published list of employees. To the extent the Act confers legal privileges or responsibilities on those categories, the regulations determine who will receive them. The regulations themselves do not define the scope or content of those privileges and responsibilities; that remains located in the Evidence Act 1906.

The regulations themselves contain no penalty provisions and do not establish a separate enforcement regime. They are declaratory and administrative instruments that map offices and persons into definitions in the Act; the instrument text contains no offences, no pecuniary penalties and no enforcement mechanisms.

Enforcement, where relevant, therefore depends on the Act and other laws that use its definitions. Because the regulations link to section 50B(1) of the Evidence Act 1906, any breach of duties or contraventions that would be actionable under the Evidence Act or other substantive statutes will be enforced under those statutes and their established enforcement channels. The regulations do not create additional sanctions for non-compliance with the listing or for misrepresenting the prescribed status.

Practical enforcement implications to note, based strictly on the instrument:

• Verification and admissibility: Courts and parties may rely on the published list to accept that a particular person is a "forensic scientist" or that an office is an "authorised officer" under the Act. Challenges to that status would proceed under the Act's evidentiary rules and ordinary court processes; the regulations supply a public, prima facie identification that can be used to streamline proof of status.

• Administrative update and remedy: If a person is no longer employed in the Forensic Biology Department, the regulations do not set a statutory process for removal from the list; removal or addition is effected by amendment of the regulations, as shown by the amendment history. Any dispute over whether a particular individual is properly on or off the list would therefore be a question of fact and administrative action reflected in the subordinate legislation record, rather than a regulatory infraction with an immediate penalty.

• No enforcement provisions within the instrument: the absence of penalty clauses means that the regulatory text imposes no independent compliance obligations enforceable by inspectors or regulators under this instrument. Regulatory effect flows through the Act not through standalone sanctioning powers in the regulations.

In short, enforcement and penalties related to the status conferred by these regulations sit with the Act and other statutes; the regulations provide public, named identification but do not themselves create sanctioning tools.

The regulations are explicitly cross-referential. The instrument interacts with at least three legal texts or processes identified within the source.

• Evidence Act 1906, section 50B(1). The immediate statutory connection is to the Evidence Act 1906: the regulations operate "for the purposes of the definition" of "authorised officer" and "forensic scientist" in section 50B(1) of that Act (Regs 4(2) and 5). The regulations therefore determine which office and which persons fall within those statutory definitions. Any legal consequences, evidentiary presumptions or procedural rules that rely on those definitions will thus apply to the prescribed entities through the Act's mechanisms.

• Health Services Act 2016, section 32(1). Regulation 3 defines "PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA" by reference to an order made under s.32(1) of the Health Services Act 2016. The corporate existence and naming of PathWest is therefore governed by that other statute; the regulation imports the corporate identity created under the Health Services Act into the evidence-prescribing framework. Any organisational changes at PathWest that are effected by order under the Health Services Act will therefore be relevant to interpretation of the regulations.

• Subordinate legislation and Gazette mechanics. The regulations rely on the subordinate legislation process and Gazette publication both for commencement and for amendment. Regulation 2 ties commencement to publication in the Gazette or to the coming into force of a provision in another Act (Evidence Amendment Act 2004 s.4). The compilation table records a series of statutory instruments and Gazette notices (for example, SL 2022/204; SL 2023/163; SL 2025/77) that inserted or amended reg 3 through reg 5. That establishes the administrative pathway: changes to the prescribed office or the list of persons require new subordinate legislation and Gazette publication to take effect.

Additionally, the compilation includes an uncommenced provision reference to the Evidence Act 2025 that has not yet commenced (see Uncommenced provisions table entry). That signals a potential statutory development that may affect definitions in the future; however, the regulations as published operate against the current Evidence Act and the definitions in s.50B(1) as they exist at the time the regulations are in force.

The interaction pattern is therefore functional: the regulations do not broaden or alter other statutes, but they import a specific State corporate identity and named employees into the Evidence Act's definitional regime, using the subordinate legislation mechanism as the updating method. Practitioners need to read Regs 3 to 5 alongside s.50B(1) of the Evidence Act and any orders under the Health Services Act to understand fully who has the prescribed status at any given time.

The instrument has been amended repeatedly since first made, and the compilation table and marginal notes provide the complete history as included in the supplied source. The amendment history shows a pattern of periodic updates to the prescribed persons and the PathWest definition. Key entries from the compilation table and regulation notes are:

• Original instrument: Evidence (Prescribed Persons) Regulations 2005, published 6 May 2005 and commencing 18 June 2005 (see Reg 2 and Gazette 17 Jun 2005 p. 2658).

• Multiple amendment instruments over the years: Amendment Regulations in 2005, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020. These are listed in the compilation table with publication and commencement details. The reprint as at 23 Nov 2012 is noted.

• Insertions and later amendments recorded in regulation marginal notes: Regulation 3 (definition of PathWest) was inserted by SL 2022/204 r.4. Regulation 4 (office prescribed) was inserted with Gazette notice 19 Jun 2018 p. 2077 and later amended SL 2022/204 r.5. Regulation 5 (persons prescribed) was inserted by SL 2022/204 r.6 and subsequently amended by SL 2023/163 r.4 and SL 2025/77 r.4. The dates in the marginal notes show insertion 2022, amendment 2023 and amendment 2025 for the persons list; the office prescription was added in 2018 and amended in 2022.

• Commencement entries: Each amendment instrument in the compilation table records commencement arrangements, typically immediate operation on publication dates or on the dates specified in the instrument. Regulation 2 itself fixes commencement rules for the principal instrument.

• Uncommenced legislation note: The uncommenced provisions table records that the Evidence Act 2025 assented to 25 Sep 2025 has an uncommenced section s.387(d) and that certain provisions remain to be proclaimed. The instrument notes that the text of uncommenced provisions is available in "Acts as passed" on the WA legislation website.

In practice, the amendment history shows that the State maintains the list and the PathWest definition by updating the regulations through statutory instruments and Gazette publication. The 2023 and 2025 amendments to Regulation 5 show that the named-person list has been actively updated recently, and the insertion of Regulation 3 in 2022 shows a relatively recent move to tie the PathWest definition to the Health Services Act order. The marginal notes appended to Regulations 3, 4 and 5 explicitly identify the SL instruments responsible for those changes.

For users, this history demonstrates two points: first, that the prescribed list is intended to be updated as personnel and corporate arrangements change; second, that the correct and current list must be checked against the most recent consolidated or reprinted instrument and the Gazette notices referenced in the compilation table to ensure up-to-date reliance.

The regulations provided contain no references to judicial decisions, reported litigation, or administrative appeals that interpret or apply the instrument. The compilation and marginal notes also do not list any cases. There are therefore no cases named in the source material, and no litigation history is recorded in the instrument or its compilation notes.

Consequently, practitioners wishing to know how courts have treated the regulatory prescriptions must search external case law databases for decisions that mention section 50B(1) of the Evidence Act 1906 in combination with these regulations; that search result is not contained in the supplied text. From the regulations themselves, only the legislative instruments and Gazette notices are recorded in the compilation table. The instrument does not identify any interpretations, disputes or judicial constructions of its provisions.

In operational terms, the absence of litigation history in the text means there is no recorded judicial gloss on the effect of prescribing these particular offices and persons in the supplied source. Any authoritative interpretative guidance on how courts treat the fact of prescription will need to be obtained from case law external to the instrument.

The regulations are short and seem straightforward, but the source reveals a number of practical pitfalls and implementation risks that practitioners and compliance officers should note. Each "gotcha" below is grounded in the text and amendment record.

• Publication and commencement timing. Regulation 2 ties commencement to Gazette publication or to the coming into operation of a provision in another Act. The compilation table confirms many instruments commence on different dates. Practitioners must therefore check the exact commencement date for any particular amendment instrument; assuming immediate effect on the date of an amendment instrument without checking the Gazette entry or the instrument's own commencement clause risks relying on an out-of-date list. The compilation table entries show staggered commencement arrangements.

• Reliance on a nominative list. Reg 5 contains a table of given and family names. Because the list is nominative rather than expressed as a class defined by qualifications or rank, any personnel changes (resignations, retirements, internal transfers, name changes) will not automatically update the regulation. The marginal notes show the list has been amended repeatedly by SL instruments; updating requires an amending regulation. The practical risk is that a person may cease to be employed in the Forensic Biology Department but remain on the published list until the State processes a further amendment.

• Absence of transitional rules for temporary arrangements. The regulations do not set out a mechanism for acting appointments, temporary secondments or interim replacements. The text simply prescribes named persons and an office in PathWest. If the chief pathologist is temporarily absent or an acting chief pathologist is in place, the regulations do not state whether that acting officer is treated as the prescribed office. Similarly, if a non-listed forensic scientist performs work for PathWest, the regulations do not provide a mechanism for that person to be temporarily covered.

• Linkage to PathWest's statutory ordering. The definition of PathWest in Reg 3 depends on an order made under Health Services Act 2016 s.32(1). If the corporate name or ordering mechanism changes, or if the order is rescinded or replaced, there may be an interface issue about whether the prescription in these regulations continues to operate as intended. In practice, Reg 3 imports the order into the definitional scheme, but the regulation does not itself reproduce the order or set out how to treat organisational reorganisations.

• Public listing of names. The regulation publishes given names and family names in the Gazette and in the consolidated regulation. If there are privacy or confidentiality concerns for employees, the instrument does not provide any alternative or anonymised route. Any statutory use of the list will therefore occur in public materials.

• Potential mismatch between employment condition and list. Reg 5 states the persons are those "employed in the Forensic Biology Department of PathWest Laboratory Medicine WA". If an individual shares a name with a person at PathWest but is not employed in that specific department, there is a potential identity confusion risk. Practitioners must verify both identity and current employment status rather than assuming the name alone is determinative.

• Future legislative changes. The uncommenced provisions table notes that parts of the Evidence Act 2025 remain to be proclaimed. The regulations are narrowly tied to the definitions in s.50B(1) of the 1906 Act as currently enacted. If the Evidence Act is amended or replaced, the regulatory prescriptions may need to be revisited to ensure they align with new definitions or structural changes. The instrument provides no transitional or amendment protocol tied to a future Evidence Act.

• Administrative burden for updates. The amendment history shows that updating the list requires subordinate legislation and Gazette publication. For PathWest, whose staff may change more rapidly than the amendment process, this creates an administrative lag. The cost of keeping the list current is borne by the State through its legislative processes and requires coordination.

Each of these gotchas follows directly from the form and content of the regulations and the amendment mechanics recorded in the compilation table and marginal notes.

Compliance with this instrument is primarily a matter of using the published, current list and following the Act for substantive obligations. Practical compliance steps, tied to the text, are as follows.

• Verify the current consolidated instrument before relying on status. Because the regulations are amended by statutory instruments that commence on different dates and are published in the Gazette, always consult the most recent consolidated regulations or the Gazette notices cited in the compilation table (for example, SL 2022/204; SL 2023/163; SL 2025/77) to confirm whether a particular office or person is currently prescribed. Regulation 2 links commencement to Gazette publication; the compilation table records exact commencement dates for amendments.

• For courts and practitioners: when you need to establish that a person is a "forensic scientist" or an office is an "authorised officer" for the purposes of the Evidence Act 1906 s.50B(1), cite the relevant regulation provision and the current consolidated list. The regulations supply a statutory identification mechanism that reduces the need for separate proof of qualification; but because the regulations do not define substantive rights or duties, use them only to establish status and then apply the Act to determine the substantive consequences.

• For PathWest administrators: maintain internal records that map staff and office-holders to the public list. If the organisation intends that a new staff member or a change in office-holder should be treated as a prescribed person or office under the Act, initiate the standard process for a regulatory amendment. The instrument's amendment notes show that additions and deletions occur by SL instrument and Gazette notice; anticipate that the administrative timeline will include drafting and publication steps.

• For employees named or intended to be named: ensure your employment in the Forensic Biology Department is current and documented. The regulation conditions the prescription on employment in that specified department; if your role or department changes, inform the employer if you are to be removed from or added to the public list.

• For parties relying on forensic reports from PathWest: if you receive evidence from a PathWest officer, check the current list to determine whether the report author appears in Reg 5. If the author is listed, you may rely on the prescribed status for Act-related purposes; if not, account for potential differences in admissibility or evidentiary treatment and be prepared to establish credentials through other means.

• Monitor broader statutory change. The uncommenced provisions table shows that parts of the Evidence Act 2025 are not yet in operation. Practitioners should monitor proclamations and amendments to the Evidence Act, because any change to the definitional structure of the Act could alter how these regulations operate.

• Recordkeeping and proof: when relying on the regulation to establish status, record the version of the regulation consulted and the Gazette notice or SL instrument that shows the relevant amendment. Because commencement is tied to publication events, contemporaneous proof of the applicable instrument will assist in avoiding disputes about whether the named person or office was prescribed at the relevant time.

Who pays and who decides. The administrative cost of preparing, making and publishing amendments to the regulations is borne by the State through its subordinate legislation machinery; the decision to add or remove a name or to prescribe a particular office is implemented by executive action in the form of a statutory instrument and Gazette publication. Employers and listed employees bear the operational cost of ensuring internal alignment with the public list. Parties and courts bear the practical cost of verifying current prescriptions when they depend on Act-related status.

By following these steps, practitioners and organisations can use the regulations as intended: as a public, authoritative identification mechanism that connects PathWest's chief pathologist office and specified Forensic Biology Department employees to the definitional framework of the Evidence Act 1906.