Those VPG documents have got quite a few mistakes.
For example "Request Clearance" should say "Request Taxi" A few pilots at Jandakot were getting told off for saying "Request Clearance" by one of the more pedantic controllers. As he said, the VPGs do not override the AIP.
Just shows you can only trust the actual reference, not what your instructor says, not the BAK book, not even CASA people. "My instructor said" would not carry any weight in a court of law, ignorance is no defence and it's high time instructor courses covered legal responsibilities and liabilities.
And the point andrewr made about liability is the reason I don't let student pilots carry passengers. eg, I once had a naughty student who was authorised for an area solo to practice his steep turns. (No GFPT.) A couple of hours later as I was pacing worriedly and needing the aircraft for the next student he rang to say he had gone to meet some mates at an aerodrome in the training area for a barbecue and would be a bit late back and by the way he was giving one of his mates a lift back 'cos there was an instructor there who had organised it all and said it would be OK....
Needless to say I was happy to pass him on to another school.
Had something happened and he had pranged at the other aerodrome (where he had never been before, had no idea of non controlled aerodrome procedures etc) I could have been liable even though I hadn't authorised it. If he had brought back a passenger and pranged and left that passenger needing a lifetime of full time care, I could have been liable even though I hadn't authorised it.
The criminal code and strict liability is bad enough, there is no mention of what could happen in a civil case.