Chain of Responsibility obligations: who is responsible for heavy vehicle safety?

Direct answer. Under Australia's Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL), a business can have Chain of Responsibility (CoR) duties because of what it does in a heavy vehicle transport task, even if it does not own a truck or employ its driver. The primary duty requires each CoR party to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the safety of its transport activities. That includes managing the risks it can influence and avoiding conduct that causes or encourages another person to break the law. A consignee setting an impossible delivery slot, a warehouse loading a vehicle, and a carrier rostering its driver may all have different controls to apply to the same journey. The duty cannot simply be transferred to the carrier by contract. NHVR primary-duty advice; NHVR primary-duty scope.

This guide covers businesses operating under the HVNL in the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Victoria. The HVNL has not commenced in Western Australia or the Northern Territory; those jurisdictions have their own heavy vehicle rules. A vehicle from WA or the NT can nevertheless become subject to the HVNL when it enters an HVNL jurisdiction. Check the route and the relevant state or territory application law before treating any national summary as the whole answer. NHVR: HVNL and Regulations.

Start with the function your business performs

The CoR is built around functions in the transport chain, not business labels. The NHVR identifies ten: employer of a heavy vehicle driver; prime contractor engaging a self-employed driver; operator directing the vehicle's control and use; scheduler; consignor; consignee; packer; loading manager; loader; and unloader. One business can perform several functions. A retailer that orders stock, dictates a delivery slot and unloads at its depot should assess each activity rather than assume that its transport contract makes the carrier solely responsible. NHVR: who is a CoR party?.

The statutory CoR term prime contractor is a person engaging a self-employed driver under a contract for services. It is not the same as a construction principal contractor under WHS legislation. Likewise, a truck driver is not automatically a CoR party merely for driving, although the driver has other road-transport obligations; an owner-driver may perform a CoR function. This distinction matters when assigning owners to controls and evidence.

Map actual decisions. Who sets delivery windows? Who selects the vehicle and route? Who packs and secures the load? Who controls yard access and queues? Who checks whether a load can be accepted safely? The answer may be split between organisations. Record the activity, the decision maker and the evidence that the resulting risk is controlled. A generic list of “responsible companies” will miss the operational decisions that create pressure.

What the primary duty requires

Section 26C of the HVNL is the central duty. As described by the NHVR, each CoR party must ensure the safety of its transport activities so far as is reasonably practicable. Its conduct must not directly or indirectly cause or encourage a driver to contravene the HVNL or a speed limit, or another person to contravene the law. The duty concerns the party's transport activities and the risks it can influence or control; it is not a promise to eliminate every possible hazard on the road. NHVR primary-duty regulatory advice; NHVR primary-duty scope.

“Reasonably practicable” calls for an assessment of the relevant risk and suitable available controls. It does not mean choosing the cheapest procedure or delegating the question to the driver. The NHVR's practical sequence is to identify transport activities and hazards, assess the risks, determine reasonably practicable controls, implement them, then monitor whether they work. Its guidance gives examples such as training, procedures, equipment, vehicle or premises changes, inspections and information exchange. NHVR: complying with the primary duty.

The HVNL also contains specific rules on fatigue, speeding, mass, dimension, loading and vehicle standards. A CoR review should identify which of those subjects the business can affect. For example, a booking team may not maintain the truck but can create waiting time and scheduling pressure. A depot may not roster the driver but controls its loading process. A carrier may control rostering and maintenance but need accurate load information from a customer. The same primary duty applies to parties in different functions, while the practical control differs with their influence. NHVR CoR FAQs.

Build a control map for the actual journey

Use one representative delivery or passenger journey. Trace it from order or booking to unloading or completion. At each handover, ask what can go wrong, who can alter that risk and what evidence will show the control worked. For a freight movement, a useful map might cover:

1. Order and scheduling: realistic lead times, delivery windows, route and site constraints, driver rest, and a route for renegotiating an unsafe instruction.
2. Vehicle and driver allocation: fitness of the vehicle for the load and route, maintenance information, driver competency and fatigue arrangements within the operator's control.
3. Packing and load information: accurate description, mass and dimensions, packaging, restraint needs, and communication to whoever loads and carries it.
4. Yard and loading: safe access, queuing, supervision, loading equipment, load distribution, restraint checks and a stop-work escalation.
5. Travel and exceptions: changes to route or timing, breakdowns, extreme weather, delays and instructions that might encourage speeding or a missed rest break.
6. Receipt and unloading: safe arrival slot, traffic separation, unloading capacity, damaged-load decisions and feedback on any unsafe condition.

This is a management aid, not a prescribed HVNL form. Adapt it to actual activities. A passenger operator, waste contractor or agricultural consignor will have a different risk map. Where the road journey crosses into WA or the NT, add the relevant jurisdiction's requirements rather than assuming the HVNL alone covers the entire operation.

Example: an “urgent” delivery. A buyer asks for a delivery by 7 a.m. after moving its loading appointment forward. The carrier says the trip now conflicts with the driver's available work/rest schedule. A poor CoR response is to insist that the carrier “make it happen” because fatigue compliance is in its contract. A better response is to change the slot or transport plan, record the revised instruction and ensure the carrier can raise the problem without commercial penalty. This example illustrates the risk of causing or encouraging another party's breach; it is not a claim that every tight deadline is itself unlawful.

Contracts help coordinate controls; they do not remove the duty

A transport contract should say who provides load details, who maintains vehicles, who checks mass and restraint, how delivery slots change, who can stop loading and how hazards are reported. These are useful arrangements because different parties need each other's information. They do not transfer one party's primary duty away. The NHVR expressly cautions that the duty cannot be transferred or lessened through a contract. NHVR primary-duty scope.

Avoid contract clauses that say the carrier accepts “all CoR liability” while the customer continues to dictate unrealistic schedules or provide inaccurate weights. Review the actual working relationship as well as the written allocation. A practical agreement should provide a way to correct an unsafe instruction, exchange safety information, investigate recurring problems and review controls when work changes.

For multi-party sites, document handovers in a format people use. A loading manager needs the arrival plan and load profile before the truck reaches the gate; a driver needs to know whom to contact if the load differs from the booking; the consignee needs a process for rejecting or safely managing an unsafe arrival. A signed agreement without those channels may look complete in a file while leaving the risk unmanaged.

Decide what evidence to keep

There is no single universal “CoR certificate” that proves every obligation has been met. Evidence should match the risks and decisions in your operation. Examples include a transport-activity map, documented risk assessments, role and escalation instructions, booking or scheduling changes, load information, training records, vehicle or equipment inspection evidence, contractor reviews, incident investigations and records of control updates. Do not gather documents solely to fill a folder; ask what each record demonstrates and who acts on it.

The NHVR's 2026 Master Code provides activity-based guidance and examples of risk controls. It is a registered industry code intended to help parties understand known risks and controls, not a replacement for the HVNL or a guarantee that following every example will satisfy the primary duty. Check its current version when updating a safety system. NHVR 2026 Master Code announcement.

Executives of a CoR party also have a due-diligence duty. They need to understand the business's transport activities and risks, support suitable resources and systems, and verify that those systems are being used. A board report saying “transport outsourced” is not a substitute for understanding the risks the business still creates through its own orders, sites and contracts. NHVR: executive duty and due diligence.

Review the system when operations change

Revisit CoR controls when a new depot opens, a route changes, delivery windows tighten, a different type of vehicle is used, a new contractor takes work, or a near miss reveals an assumption that failed. A control that worked for a local daytime route may be inadequate for a longer night operation. Review whether people can still follow the written procedure, whether exceptions are escalated and whether information reaches the party who needs it before the activity starts.

Look at leading evidence as well as incidents. Repeated late departures, recurring yard queues, rejected loads, unplanned vehicle substitutions and driver complaints may show a mismatch between the commercial plan and the safe transport plan. Investigate the cause before treating each event as an isolated paperwork error. Record the revised decision, communicate it to affected parties and verify that the change altered the practice.

This is where a digital record system may help: it can organise the evidence, assign review owners and make current documents easier to find if those functions are confirmed in the deployed product. It cannot decide what is reasonably practicable, certify a transport plan as lawful or assume a CoR party's duty. For Complys, the designated commercial destination is chain of responsibility software; confirm its current capabilities and route with the repository before making a feature-specific publication claim.

Common mistakes

Assuming truck ownership determines every duty. A consignor, consignee, packer or loader may influence risk even without a vehicle fleet. Map functions and decisions.

Treating the carrier's signature as the control. A contract can allocate tasks and information, but it cannot transfer the primary duty. Test whether instructions and schedules are safe in practice.

Copying a generic risk register. Describe the actual vehicle, site, route, load and handover risks. Then show how controls are implemented and checked.

Ignoring pressure created upstream. Booking and sales decisions can influence a driver's speed, rest and load choices. Give staff a route to revise an unsafe commercial promise.

Confusing guidance with law. The 2026 Master Code offers authoritative practical guidance. The HVNL and applicable state or territory law set duties. The business must evaluate its own risks and controls.

Using “Australia-wide” as if one law applies in every state. The HVNL has not commenced in WA or the NT. Check where the activity occurs, including cross-border legs.

A practical next step

Pick one frequent transport task and identify every organisation and CoR function involved. Record the decisions each makes, the public-safety risks it can influence, the controls already in place and the person who will test them. Close the most consequential gap before expanding the exercise across other routes. If you are evaluating Complys' Australian CoR software page, ask for a demonstration of how your real evidence and review workflow would be recorded; do not assume the software itself performs a statutory CoR assessment.

Source and claim register — checked 5 October 2026