30Defence of appropriate diligence

30 Defence of appropriate diligence (1) In a proceeding for an offence against this part, it is a defence if the defendant proves that the defendant took all reasonable precautions and exercised all appropriate diligence to prevent the commission of the offence by the defendant or by another person under the defendant’s control. (2) Without limiting how the defendant may satisfy subsection (1), the defendant satisfies the subsection if the defendant proves— (a) that the commission of the offence was caused by— (i) an act or omission of another person; or (ii) reliance on information supplied by another person; and

Defences Division 3.4 (b) that— (i) the defendant carried out all checks of the food concerned as were reasonable in all the circumstances; or (ii) it was reasonable in all the circumstances to rely on checks carried out by the person who supplied the food concerned to the defendant; and (c) that the defendant did not import the food into the ACT from another country; and (d) for an offence involving the sale of food— (i) that the defendant sold the food in the same condition as the defendant purchased it; or (ii) that the defendant sold the food in a different condition to that in which the defendant purchased it, but that the difference did not result in a contravention of this Act; and (e) that the defendant did not know and had no reason to suspect at the time of commission of the offence that the defendant’s act or omission was an offence against this part. (3) In subsection (2) (a): another person does not include a person who was— (a) an employee or agent of the defendant; or (b) if the defendant is a corporation—an executive officer, employee or agent of the defendant.

(4) Without limiting how the defendant may satisfy subsection (1) or (2) (b) (i), the defendant satisfies the provision if the defendant proves— (a) for an offence relating to a food business for which a food safety program is required to be prepared under a regulation—that the defendant complied with a food safety program for the food business that complies with the requirements of the regulations; or (b) in any other case—that the defendant complied with a scheme (for example, a quality assurance program or an industry code of practice) that was— (i) designed to manage food safety hazards and based on Australian national or international standards, codes or guidelines designed for that purpose; and (ii) documented in some way.