Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

NSW ECE 22.05 helmets now legal?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Macaroni646, Nov 3, 2015.

  1. Amcn claims that ece 22.05 certified helmets are now legal to be worn in Nsw but I cannot find any other sources to confirm it. Can anyone confirm this???

    Lane Filtering And Euro Helmets Now Legal
  2. This is the first I've heard of it
  3. Here's another one

  4. It is in Victoria here is the link. I checked for NSW and found this page about helmets. Clearly, you can't use ECE 22.05 in NSW ! I got shocked ! Now if i use my Schubert helmet and go to NSW and if a cop stops me and checks my helmet. Seriously can he fine me ?

    Protective clothing for riders : VicRoads

    Helmets - Motorcyclists - Staying safe - NSW Centre for Road Safety
  5. MCC of NSW just announced via their facebook page that ECE 22.05 helmets are now approved for use in NSW!
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Here's the Road Amendment Rule:

    Attached Files:

    • Informative Informative x 3
  7. Dunno. Where is Justus when we need him?

    I have a suspicion that there is some kind of inter state agreement that someone driving or riding "legally" in their home state is therefor entitled to drive/ride in some other state..... but, don't bet on it, I am not a lawyer.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Read the previous two posts: it is legal (from today) to ride in NSW wearing an ECE r22.05 approved helmet.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Yes, dear, I did, but, as I say, I think there is a general principle that someone driving/riding legally in their home state is sort of automatically allowed to ride/ride in other states.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Thank you, sweetness. I fear that you have been poorly advised and the Road Rules for the State in question is what counts.

    Licence or permit conditions, however, do carry across into other States. Which is why we will see a NSW learner licence holder doodling along at the required NSW speed restriction (now 90kph) when in Victoria, yet a Victorian learner can drive at the posted speed limit when in NSW.

  11. Thats what i love here...................... everyone is so nice to each other, so very kind............................................:whistle::whistle::whistle::whistle::whistle::whistle:

    ha ha ha
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Oh is that all the interstate carry over is?

    Well, thanks for that.

    I had thought that there was much more to it, but then again, that might be impinging on state's rights or some such.

    It does seem rather unreasonable to expect someone living in Vic to have to be aware of and obey all the minutia of NSW or SA road rules where they differ from Vic. <shrug>

    But they couldn't agree on the rail gauge either.
  13. Yes it does and why the states can't work their shit out and standardise road rules is a great mystery.

    Re Helmets the only thing I have thought Chapter 5 Section 117 of the Australian Constitution may apply. It would require a serious lawyer. :)

    117. A subject of the Queen, resident in any State, shall not be subject in any other State to any disability or discrimination which would not be equally applicable to him if he were a subject of the Queen resident in such other State.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. That was the grand plan in 1999 when they introduced the Australian Road Rules. Then every state went and broke it straight away by adding their own bits and pieces.
  15. Someone else here has raised that argument in relation to the JAS/ANZ requirement for an external standards sticker, which applies in NSW and VIC but nowhere else. It's not an argument that I'd be confident to run.

    On its face, s117 only applies to discrimination that is based on the State of residency. It’s not enough that it inconveniences someone who just happens to reside in another state. The discrimination or 'disability' imposed by a regulation must be due to the residency of the individual concerned. (Yes, it's a bit nitpicky but these fine details are particularly important in constitutional law.)

    Also, the Courts have recognised that there must be exceptions to section 117, one of which is the regulation of conduct that threatens the safety of a State or its people. It’s perfectly arguable that State helmet regulation is aimed at a proper objective (eg road safety) and is appropriate and adapted to that purpose.

    That said, constitutional law isn't my specialisation and I'm certainly no High Court justice, but the general direction of the few s117 cases doesn't really compel the conclusion that States can't have their own road safety rules. Anyway, it'll only be a problem until we have ECE 22.05 nationwide, which at this rate will happen before we're too deep into 2016 (thanks to the efforts of all involved).
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. That was my understanding of the vibe of it too ... it would have been interesting to see a High Court helmet challenge but I guess that's not on the cards now :-/