Live animal exporters ‘can’t be touched’ for sheep losses under federal law

Terry Sim, April 30, 2018

Dr Malcolm Caulfield

AUSTRALIAN livestock exporters are correct in their claim that ownership of livestock transfers to the importer at the loading port under current contractual arrangements, animal welfare lawyer Dr Malcolm Caulfield said today.

The revelation is expected to increase the focus for action against livestock export operators to the Western Australia government and away from the Federal Government, potentially before the findings of Agriculture Minister David Littleproud’s reviews of his own department’s handling of animal welfare issues and into northern summer exports to the Middle East.

Dr Caulfield, the Animal Law Institute’s principal solicitor, said today that on a close reading of the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock, the section referring to on-board care of livestock “is written in such a way it is likely that the exporter can’t be touched.”

“If you had asked me that question previously, I would have said yes, for a breach of ASEL, exporters are liable.”

However, under current contractual arrangements, when an exporter supplies livestock to an importer for shipment on a free-on-board basis, on delivery to the ship dockside, ownership transfer occurs to the importer.

Also the current ASEL document clearly states in several places, and in Standard 4.16: “As the livestock for export are loaded on board the vessel at the port of export, responsibility for the livestock transfers to the master of the vessel, who must be notified of any aspect of the preparation of the livestock for export that might affect their future health and welfare.”

“When you read this with the provisions of the relevant Act relating to breach of ASEL, which must be complied with as a condition of an export licence, in my view, it is unlikely that an exporter can be found guilty under Federal law where animals suffer and die on board an export ship,” Dr Caulfield said.

Beleaguered Western Australian exporter Graham Daws reiterated in a letter to producers last week defending his company Emanuel Exports that: “Emanuel is not the owner nor charterer of any vessel, and ownership of livestock transfers to the importer at the loading port.”

Mr Daws also said DAWR had found, that despite the loss of about 2400 sheep in an August 2017 Awassi Express shipment to the Middle East, there were no ASEL breaches, and an Australian Maritime Safety Authority investigation concluded “all livestock services were operating satisfactorily during the voyage.”

WA government has the power to take action

However, Dr Caulfield said his understanding of the powers of federal and state laws in regard to live export of animals also indicated that the Western Australian government did have powers to prosecute livestock exporters who send animals on voyages knowing they are likely to suffer very poor welfare or die.

Dr Caulfield said exporters have always argued that the export of livestock is governed by federal law and under section 109 of the Australian Constitution, if a state parliament and the Federal Parliament pass conflicting laws on the same subject, then the federal law overrides the state law. However he noted that this constitutional override had not been tested in a higher court. Emanuel Exports were found not guilty of breaching the state Animal Welfare Act in 2008 in the Magistrates Court on this basis.

“However, if you stop to think about it, if what Emanuel Exports is saying is true, and I think it is true, they can’t run that argument – they can’t have their cake and eat it.

“Because if they are saying the exporter isn’t liable because of the way ASEL is written in regards to livestock on-board, the state law applies.” Dr Caulfield said.

“The way the (WA) state law is written, the person who is liable is defined as the person in charge and then that is extensively defined in the interpretation section.”

Dr Caulfield said he wrote a legal opinion piece on this issue 15 years ago and said the WA state animal welfare law in relation to live export of animals “captures almost everybody, including the exporter.”

“It captures a ship owner, the owner of the animals which (on-board) is probably the importer, it captures the captain of the ship and it captures the exporter, but what is clear is that this matter needs to be tested in a court.”

DAWR and its ministers complacent – Caulfield

Dr Caulfield said it seems clear from what Western Australian Minister Alannah MacTiernan has said that she has received legal advice that the sort of suffering seen on whistleblower Faisal Ullah’s footage is probably in breach of the state’s Animal Welfare Act.

“However, that leaves open the question of why both the Federal Minister, David Littleproud, and his department, seem not to be aware of the legal issues raised by Emanuel Exports.

“It also prompts questions about the inquiry currently going on into the advisability of shipping animals to the Middle East in the northern summer, because if Emanuel Exports is right, an exporter cannot be prosecuted under federal live export law, no matter how bad the suffering,” he said.

Dr Caulfield said the current federal laws governing live export make a mockery of Mr Littleproud stating that someone will be held to account over the disturbing footage showing dead and dying sheep in over-crowded and hot conditions, released earlier this month by Animals Australia and 60 Minutes.

“I will not be afraid to call out and take strong action against those who have not fulfilled their responsibilities, whether they be the exporter, the regulator or staff on ships,” Mr Littleproud said after viewing the 60 Minutes footage.

Dr Caulfield said the continuance of DAWR’s inaction over live export issues speaks its level of complicity with the trade.

“In all the years that I have been monitoring this trade, the department has always been utterly concerned with protecting the interests of the exporter and I have seen time and time again, complaints relating to exactly this sort of hanky panky.

“The departments nor their ministers have had no interest in holding anybody to account; that’s the bottom line,” he said.

“What is obviously needed is for this to be resolved either between the state and federal governments, which would need a change to the federal law, or a prosecution under the state law, which would resolve the matter in a court.”

The offices of Minister Littleproud, the DAWR and the WA Agriculture and Food Minister Alannah MacTiernan were contacted for comment.

Click here to read Graham Daws’ description of the August 2017 Awassi Express voyage.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your comment will not appear until it has been moderated.
Contributions that contravene our Comments Policy will not be published.


  1. jennifer macdougall, May 3, 2018

    Emanuel’s Mr Daws refuses to acknowledge that that footage was not just one voyage; it was several. And just one year earlier Emanuel Exports lost over 3000 sheep from heat stress in July 2016. The department admitted it could not determine what had happened to about 1200 of those, but assumed they had died along with Emanuel’s admitted loss of 1741. The department said the dead sheep could not be accessed to remove them. Well, we saw why that might be the case in this last outrage — that is the norm Mr Daws, with heat stress, not a one-off. Mr Daws should be put on a ship with one of those sheep and sent into 40 degrees and forced to sit with the sheep the entire journey.

  2. Kim Dutton, May 1, 2018

    Trying to understand who is ultimately responsible for this blatant animal cruelty is difficult and no one is raising their hand. I suspect a cunning plan involving twists and turns to confuse any who investigate and many individuals who benefit financially. The one thing everyone agrees on is exploitation of Australian animals who are suffering and during in tragic circumstances.

  3. Vikii Warne, May 1, 2018

    Can the importer be prosecuted?

  4. Suzanne Fok, May 1, 2018

    Alannah MacTierrman, if you have any conscience whatsoever and the ethics that go along with your conscience, stop live export. You have the power to stop the suffering of these animals; do it.

  5. Katrina Love, National Vice President, Animal Justice Party, May 1, 2018

    All the more reason to shut down the entire trade then – not just the trade to the Middle East, if federal regulations can’t be enforced.

  6. Pamela Blunt, April 30, 2018

    Therefore, the WA minister Alannah MacTiernan has the authority to prevent livestock from suffering on board any ship leaving Fremantle port.

  7. StopTAC, April 30, 2018

    In a case that went to the SA Ombudsman in 2010, also involving Emanuel Exports and the Al Messilah, when the ship broke down the sheep were finally, after nine days, offloaded. The Ombudsman found that the animals are under the protection of state animal welfare laws for as long as they are within Australian territorial waters. Therefore, state enforcement bodies, including the RSPCA, have jurisdiction until the animals leave Australian territorial waters. Full names required in future for reader comments please StopTAC, as per Sheep Central’s long-standing comments policy: Editor.

Get Sheep Central's news headlines emailed to you -