Today’s question is:

If a St John NSW vehicle is at a event providing health services and they are made aware of an accident outside of the event area and know they would arrive a considerable time before any emergency service:

1. Can they attend the accident scene?

2. Can they use Red Lights/siren under these circumstances by law?

3. Would the organisation or first aiders be liable in any way if they did not render assistance?

4. Would the St. John members be liable/organisation liable in any way if there were registered health practitioners at the event and they did not try to help?

1. Can they attend the accident scene?

Yes, there is no law to say they cannot so they can. Just as anyone can.  There may be contractual issues in that if they are contracted to provide cover at an event that will stop if they leave there may be an argument that they ‘can’t’ attend – see Who to treat? A question for St John first aiders (June 30, 2013). But as a matter of law yes they can attend.

2. Can they use Red Lights/siren under these circumstances by law?

In NSW an emergency vehicle is a vehicle driven by an emergency worker in the course of their duties when responding to an emergency (Road Rules 2014 (NSW) Dictionary).   Emergency worker means, amongst other things

(a) a member of the Ambulance Service or the ambulance service of another State or Territory, in the course of providing transport in an emergency associated with the provision of aid to sick or injured persons…

(c) a person (or a person belonging to a class of persons) approved by the Authority.

It is my view that the reference to ‘the Ambulance Service’ (rather than ‘an ambulance service’) is a reference to the Ambulance Service of NSW.  It follows that unless Road and Maritime Services have approved members of St John as ‘emergency workers’, they are not emergency workers for the purposes of the Road Rules 2014, a vehicle they drive is not therefore an emergency vehicle and they have no exemption from any road rules under r 306.

That is not the end of the matter. The Light Vehicle Standards Rules set out in Schedule 2 to the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2017 (NSW) define an ‘emergency services vehicle’ as, amongst other things, ‘an ambulance’. (r 73(7)) and an ambulance may be fitted with a red or blue flashing light (r 114(7)). Only an ambulance operated by NSW ambulance may be fitted with a siren (r 33 and definition of ‘exempt vehicle’). What is an ambulance is not defined – see What’s an ambulance? (May 28, 2017).  I will assume that the St John vehicles are ambulances.

But wait – there’s more: What I’ve written above is based on the wording of the legislation. But we have seen that the definition of emergency worker includes anyone approved by the authority that is Roads and Maritime Services.  Equally the authority can exempt vehicles from the light vehicle standards (r 11E).  It follows if RMS have approved members of St John (NSW) as emergency workers and has approved the installation of a siren then that’s ok; but I cannot know what RMS have approved or not approved.

If that’s true they can be fitted with red or blue lights. The law does not say when they can be used but does say that if St John uses them, they have no legal meaning. St John do not enjoy any exemption under the Road Rules 2014. I have been provided with a copy of the St John Policy Directive: Operational Emergency Response in St John (NSW) Vehicles (8 February 2017) which confirms that my understanding is also the understanding of St John (NSW). It says (at p. 4, emphasis in original):

The use of St John (NSW) vehicles in emergency response, including the use of red warning lights or sirens, does not, under any circumstances, permit the driver to breach any of the NSW Road Rules 2014.

That would appear to confirm that there is no approval from RMS that St John members are emergency workers.

Without evidence of any RMS approval, the answer has to be that the St John members cannot lawfully use a siren when proceeding to the scene. They could use the red flashing light, but it has no legal effect. It is my view that if the lights have no legal meaning they should never be used as they will just confuse other drivers. That is also true for a siren. If warning lights and sirens are used, other drivers will assume the vehicle is an emergency vehicle, is likely to be driven in ways other vehicles are not and they are likely to assume that they are obliged, notwithstanding other road rules, to get out of the way – they may break the law or risk an accident to do so. Assuming St John vehicles are not emergency vehicles for the purposes of the Road Rules 2014 it is my view that they should never use warning lights and siren on a public street.

Driving under emergency conditions is the most dangerous thing most emergency workers will do and apart from the risk to their and other people’s safety, there is the legal risk see Court of Appeal dismisses appeal by RFS tanker driver involved in fatal collision (October 13, 2017). If there is no exemption from the Road Rules under r 306 and no related obligation on other drives to give way (rr 78 and 79) then there is no reason to use those warning devices in traffic. Their use may make sense when proceeding through pedestrian traffic in a area closed off for an event, but not on a public street.

3. Would the organisation or first aiders be liable in any way if they did not render assistance? And

4. Would the St. John members be liable/organisation liable in any way if there were registered health practitioners at the event and they did not try to help?

Probably not, but never say never. Stuart v Kirkland-Veenstra [2009] HCA 15 confirmed that there is no duty to rescue but in Lowns v Woods (1996) AustTortsReps ¶81-376, Dr Lowns was liable for failing to render assistance when he was asked at his place of practice where he was ready to, but not yet seeing patients.  On the other hand, the Western Australia Court of Appeal rejected the claim that a doctor had a duty to render assistance at a car accident. In Dekker v Medical Board of Australia [2014] WASCA 216 (at [79]) they said:

The duty, as formulated, arises without regard to the mental state of the doctor, the circumstances in which the doctor is, or may be, aware that a motor vehicle accident has occurred in his or her vicinity, and the circumstances of the accident. The duty as formulated would apply, for example, to a medical practitioner who lacked mental capacity or, for example, was affected by alcohol (eg, a doctor who has been drinking and takes a cab on the way home at the end of a long social evening). The duty would apply even if there were other emergency services on their way or already in attendance. It would apply irrespective of whether the doctor has other medical commitments (eg, if the doctor were on his or her way to perform an urgent operation). It would also apply irrespective of other, non-medical, commitments that the doctor may have (eg, a doctor on the way to a court to give evidence in answer to a subpoena). The duty as formulated would also require performance irrespective of the location of the accident. Thus, it would apply equally in a remote location in the bush where there is no town and no ready access to police or other emergency services, as in a city where the occupants of the vehicle or passers-by may be readily in a position to contact police or ambulance services. It would also require the doctor to attend where, in the circumstances in which the doctor is made aware of the accident or possible accident, it would appear that any injury would be minor.

Unlike Dr Lowns, Dr Dekker was not at work, she was in her car, at night, without a first aid kit and instead of stopping to render assistance she drove to a nearby police station to report the matter.

On duty St John members may be like Dr Lowns – they are on duty ready to see patients. But there are a myriad of circumstances to consider – what is the accident outside? What information do they have? What are their current conflicting duties to current patients and the event organiser? How long will the emergency services take to arrive? What is the skill level of the St John members etc (see again Who to treat? A question for St John first aiders (June 30, 2013). The fact that in any claim these factors would have to be considered is partly why there is no common law duty to go to the aid of others. To whom would the duty apply and when?

In Stuart v Kirkland-Veenstra the court was considering the responsibility of Victoria police to take action that may have prevented Mr Veenstra’s suicide. Crennan and Kieffel JJ having identified (at [124]) that ‘The common law does not recognise a duty to rescue another person’ went onto say (at [129]):

In principle a public authority exercising statutory powers should not be regarded by the common law any differently from a citizen. It should not be considered to have an obligation to act. But the position of a public authority is not the same as that of a citizen and the rule of equality is not regarded as wholly applicable. It has public functions and it has statutory powers which the citizen does not. Some powers might be effective to avert or minimise a risk of harm to particular persons or their property, but the statute might not oblige their use. The relevant concern of the common law is whether a public authority might nevertheless be considered to be under a duty of care which obliges it to exercise its powers in a particular way.

So there may be a duty on an authority like Victoria Police (though ultimately there was not) or say NSW Ambulance (see Failure to attend by NSW Police and Ambulance (December 18, 2013).  But St John Ambulance is not a statutory authority so it would be harder to establish a relevant duty and therefore liability. 

Conclusion

The scenario was”

…a St John NSW vehicle [presumably staffed by St John members] is at a event providing health services and they are made aware of an accident outside of the event area and know they would arrive a considerable time before any emergency service:

Can the St John members attend – subject to any contractual obligations that may stop them, of course.

Can they use the red light/siren fitted to the vehicle – subject to any specific authority granted by the Roads and Maritime Services they can use the light but without any exemption they should not. The point of warning beacons and sirens is to warn other drivers that an emergency vehicle is seeking right of way and to trigger the other drivers’ obligations to make way. If those rules (rr 306, 77 and 78) don’t apply using warning devices will merely confuse and increase the risk to everyone.

Would the organisation or first aiders be liable in any way if they did not render assistance and would it make a difference if there were registered health practitioners at the event and they did not try to help?  The question whether it’s a civil case or a professional disciplinary matter depends on what a reasonable person, or a professional peer would do in similar circumstances – and the answer depends on all the circumstances.  The starting point will be that there is unlikely to be liability as there is no duty to go to the aid of a stranger.