Road Transport (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1977 (ACT)

The parties involved in the case are not explicitly mentioned in the text. The legal issue at hand pertains to the prescribed concentration of alcohol in the blood or breath of individuals who have been drivers or driver trainers of motor vehicles on roads or road-related areas. The court was required to decide on the legal implications of having the prescribed concentration of alcohol in one's blood or breath while being a driver or driver trainer, as well as the consequences and penalties associated with such an offence. Additionally, the court had to consider the circumstances under which strict liability applies to this offence and the exceptions to the rule.

The court's reasoning and outcome can be summarised as follows: The court found that having the prescribed concentration of alcohol in the blood or breath while being a driver or driver trainer is an offence under the Road Transport (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1977 (ACT). The court emphasised that strict liability applies to this offence, meaning that the individual does not need to have intended to commit the offence for it to be applicable. However, the court also noted that a driver trainer convicted of this offence is not punishable by imprisonment. Furthermore, the court outlined the penalties for first and repeat offenders, depending on the concentration of alcohol at the time of the offence. The court also provided guidance on the admissibility of evidence related to the concentration of alcohol in the blood or breath of the accused.

No final orders are explicitly stated in the text. However, based on the court's reasoning, it can be inferred that individuals found guilty of having the prescribed concentration of alcohol in their blood or breath while being a driver or driver trainer would face penalties according to their status as a first or repeat offender and the concentration of alcohol at the time of the offence. Additionally, the court's decision on strict liability and the exceptions to the rule would play a role in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused.