Several provisions in the Act create traps for the unwary.
The retail quantity definition is narrower than expected. Under section 4A, even if a quantity does not exceed 3 000 litres, it is not a retail quantity unless it is delivered at a fixed site by a metered pump into a vehicle's running tank or a container under 250 litres capacity. This means deliveries to jerry cans at a depot, or deliveries by hose from a bulk tank to a vehicle at a non-fixed site, may not be retail sales even if under 3 000 litres, and thus may require a wholesale licence. Conversely, a sale of 10 000 litres delivered by metered pump into a vehicle's tank may be a retail sale if the quantity is below any prescribed alternative threshold? Actually, section 4A(1) says retail quantity means a quantity not exceeding 3 000 litres or other prescribed quantity, AND the delivery conditions in subsection (2) must be met. If the quantity exceeds 3 000 litres, it is not a retail quantity regardless of delivery method. But for quantities below 3 000 litres, the delivery conditions are additional requirements.
Notional sale provisions could catch unexpected transactions. Section 4D allows regulations to declare that a sale and purchase occurs in specified delivery or allocation circumstances. This means that transactions that are not sales in the ordinary sense may be deemed sales for the purpose of triggering licensing requirements or other provisions. Practitioners must check any regulations made under this section.
The Minister's exemption power under section 6 is broad and can be revoked. The Minister may exempt classes of persons or petroleum products from the Act or specified provisions, unconditionally or subject to conditions. Exemptions can be varied or revoked at any time by notice. This creates uncertainty for businesses relying on an exemption, as it can be withdrawn without cause.
Self-incrimination is not a defence but offers limited use immunity. Section 46(1) removes the right to refuse to answer questions or produce records on self-incrimination grounds. However, under section 46(2), the answer or the fact of production is not admissible in evidence against the person in proceedings for an offence or penalty other than proceedings under this Act. This means an answer given under compulsion could still be used in civil proceedings or in proceedings under the Act itself (including for licence suspension or cancellation). The immunity does not extend to the contents of a record produced; only the fact of production is protected. So if a person is compelled to produce a record, the contents can be used in proceedings under the Act.
The defence under section 57 is not available for all offences. The text says it is a defence to a charge of an offence against this Act if the defendant proves the offence was not intentional and did not result from failure to take reasonable care. However, if the offence provision itself excludes this defence by wording (for example, if it says strict liability or no defence), the section 57 defence may not apply. On the face of the Act, no section expressly excludes it, but the defence is available only where it is not inconsistent. Practitioners should check each offence provision.
The limit on proceedings against the Minister under section 37 is absolute except for Part 9 reviews. No proceedings can be instituted to compel or restrain the Minister from taking any action under Part 5 (restriction and rationing). This means that even if the Minister imposes unreasonable conditions or directions, the only recourse is the review under section 47 for decisions that are reviewable (such as licence conditions fixed under section 34? Actually, section 34(1) allows the Minister to fix conditions of licences and issue directions. Are those decisions reviewable under section 47? Section 47(1) lists decisions regarding licence issue, renewal, variation, suspension, cancellation, and permit issue and cancellation. Fixing conditions by Gazette notice during a period of restriction may not be a reviewable decision. This could leave affected persons without a remedy except perhaps judicial review on jurisdictional grounds, which section 37 might purport to exclude.
Consent to prosecute is required and may be withheld. Section 61(2) prohibits commencing a prosecution without the Minister's consent. This means even if a clear breach occurs, a private prosecution is not possible. The Minister can effectively decide whether to enforce the Act. However, the Minister's consent can be given up to five years after the offence, providing a long window for prosecutorial decisions.
Record-keeping obligations extend beyond licensees. Section 53(1) applies to any person who carries on a business involving or related to petroleum products. This includes agents, brokers, and perhaps even large end users, if the business is related to petroleum products. The Minister may specify what records must be kept from time to time by Gazette notice, so the obligation can change without amending the Act.
The register of licensees is public. Section 50 requires the Minister to keep a register of licensees available for public inspection. This means competitors and the public can see who holds licences and perhaps infer business volumes. Licensees cannot keep their authorisation status confidential.
Permits are not transferable and must be returned on cancellation. Section 36(8) prohibits transfer of permits. Section 36(7) requires return of the permit on cancellation. Failure to return carries a penalty. This means a business cannot sell or assign a permit.