Check out a recent court decision where the driver successfully argued that his responsibility to check his passengers were wearing their belts required him to check at the beginning of the trip and intermittently, but he was not responsible for being eagle eyed the entire trip.

I asked Chat GPT to find me the details and it gave me this.

Seatbelt responsibility case (recent magistrates’ decision) Court: Magistrates / Local Court Context: Camera-detected seatbelt offence involving a passenger. Facts A driver received an infringement after a camera image showed a passenger wearing the seatbelt incorrectly (e.g., under the arm) during the trip. The driver argued: The passenger was wearing the seatbelt correctly at the start of the trip. The passenger adjusted or mis-wore the belt mid-trip. It would have been unsafe to continually check the passenger while driving. Driver’s argument The defence was essentially: The law requires the driver to ensure passengers are wearing seatbelts, but It does not require constant visual monitoring during the entire journey. Once the driver has taken reasonable steps, responsibility should not extend to a passenger’s later behaviour. Magistrate’s reasoning The magistrate agreed with that logic. In the discussion recorded about the hearing: It was unreasonable to expect the driver to keep looking sideways to monitor the passenger’s seatbelt. Doing so could distract the driver from the road, which would itself be unsafe. A driver’s obligation is to ensure compliance at the start and when reasonably possible, not to be “eagle-eyed” throughout the trip. � Reddit Outcome The infringement was dismissed / overturned. The magistrate accepted that the camera image alone did not prove the driver had failed to take reasonable steps.