Rubbing Salt Into the Wound: Could Unsolicited Emergency Ambulance Fees Fall Foul of the Australian Consumer Law?

Abstract

Throughout most of Australia, emergency services laws stipulate that patients are responsible for the (significant) cost of emergency ambulance services they receive. This is so even if a third party summons the ambulance and the patient did not want, need, or consent to this. Section 40(2) of the federal Australian Consumer Law (‘ACL’), however, proscribes (with a limited exception) parties in trade or commerce from asserting a right to payment for unsolicited services they have provided. This article is the first to comprehensively analyse the interaction of these provisions, examining whether unsolicited emergency ambulance fees could come within the ambit of the ACL and conflict with the s 40(2) proscription. As will be discussed, this analysis requires consideration of many important commercial, constitutional, and practical questions. It is ultimately argued that, while plausible, emergency ambulance fees are unlikely to fall foul of the ACL, but that this uncertainty warrants statutory clarification.