The Act purports to bind the Commonwealth and other States, but immediately acknowledges it cannot prosecute them for offences. This creates a toothless obligation: entities are 'bound' by the Act but face no consequence for breaching it.
Section 5(1) states the Act does not apply to children except to allow payment of fines. Section 5(3) then states enforcement orders, fine collection notices or warrants cannot be issued against a child 'except as allowed under subsection (2)'. Subsection (2) applies the Act to 17-year-olds for transport demerit offences 'in the same way it applies to an adult'. This means a 17-year-old can have an enforcement order issued against them, but the general carve-out in s5(1) only contemplates payment of fines — creating ambiguity about what other adult provisions apply.
The registrar may delegate the power to delegate a prescribed function to a service contractor, but the delegation of this 'power to delegate' cannot permit subdelegation of the delegated power. This creates a paradox: the registrar delegates the power to delegate, but the delegatee (service contractor) cannot then further delegate that power — effectively making the delegation of 'a power to delegate' functionless, since the service contractor receives the power but cannot exercise it to delegate to anyone.
Section 15(2)(d)(iii) requires the infringement notice to state 'the place the offence was committed and, subject to subparagraph (ii), the time and date of the offence'. The cross-reference to subparagraph (ii) — which requires the 'period over which the offence was committed' for offences over a period not involving a vehicle — is intended to provide an exception to stating time and date. However, subparagraph (ii) only applies when the offence 'took place over a period and did not involve a vehicle'. The phrase 'subject to subparagraph (ii)' in (iii) suggests (ii) overrides or modifies (iii), but (ii) is a completely separate requirement that adds information rather than substituting for...
11 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
The Act is titled 'State Penalties Enforcement Act 1999' in the heading but section 1 declares the short title to be 'Commonwealth Places (Mirror Taxes Administration) Act 1999'. These are entirely different Acts dealing with entirely different subject matter.
Sections 4(1) and 4(2) are duplicated verbatim within the same section, appearing both as unnumbered paragraphs and then again as numbered subsections (sec.4-ssec.1) and (sec.4-ssec.2). The substantive provisions appear four times in total.
The CEO compliance certificate requires certifying future compliance: the CEO must certify that 'throughout the 12-month period ending on the next 30 June, Suncorp does not propose to act in a way that would contravene' the relevant provisions. This requires the CEO to certify a negative proposition about future intentions across an entire 12-month forward period, including intentions of future boards, future management, and unforeseeable circumstances.
Section 76(3) states that the transitional grace period for s.64 compliance 'does not limit section 69A', yet s.69A requires Suncorp to 'at all times act in a manner consistent with the mandatory constitution provisions'. The mandatory constitution provisions are defined by reference to s.64. So s.76 purports to grant a 6-month exemption from s.64 while simultaneously preserving the full force of s.69A which requires compliance with s.64 from the outset.
A historical version is listed as 'Current from 01/07/2022 to 16/06/2022' — the end date precedes the start date by approximately two weeks, meaning the version was apparently current before it came into existence.
Schedule 8 instructed provisions of SEPP No 36 (Manufactured Home Estates) to be transferred as Chapter 3, Part 7, but they were actually inserted as Chapter 3, Part 8. Similarly, Schedule 8 instructed provisions of SEPP No 21 (Caravan Parks) to be transferred as Chapter 3, Part 8, but they were actually inserted as Chapter 3, Part 9. The operative instrument contains internally contradictory placement instructions that were not followed as written.
Schedule 8 instructed SEPP No 36 provisions to go into Part 7 and SEPP No 21 provisions to go into Part 8. However, both were bumped up one part number each. This means Schedule 8 assigned Part 8 to two different sets of provisions simultaneously — SEPP No 36 (per the actual insertion) and SEPP No 21 (per the Schedule's own instruction) — creating a double-assignment of the same Part number in the original Schedule.
The Act binds the Commonwealth and other States but they cannot be prosecuted for offences. This creates a toothless obligation — binding entities that face no legal consequence for breach renders the binding legally meaningless in practice.
The SES is obligated to provide services as required by 'the reasonable expectations of the community' — an undefined, unverifiable and infinitely elastic standard that creates an impossible compliance obligation.
Retroactive compliance deeming for steps taken before a condition that may never be met: Section 5 deems steps taken before 'both of the actions mentioned in section 3(1)(b)(i)' to have complied with Part 2, but section 3(1)(b)(i) only describes one pathway (Commonwealth Minister's decision). A project may qualify under section 3(1)(b)(ii) (bilateral agreement) instead, meaning section 5's deeming mechanism never applies to bilateral agreement projects, leaving a gap for early steps taken in those projects.
The publication requirement for public notification in 'each State' is geographically absurd for a Queensland-specific regulatory instrument — it mandates newspaper publication in all Australian States for Queensland state infrastructure projects.
Resignation requires notice 'addressed to the Governor in Council and furnished to the Minister' — two separate recipients creating ambiguity about delivery
Section 3 contains verbatim duplicate subsections. The substantive content of subsections 3(1) and 3(2) appears twice — first as unnumbered paragraphs and then again as numbered subsections (sec.3-ssec.1) and (sec.3-ssec.2), creating internal redundancy within the same provision.
The third unnumbered paragraph providing that each plan is available for inspection at the Coordinator-General's office and on the department's website has no corresponding numbered subsection, unlike the first two paragraphs which are duplicated as subsections. This asymmetry suggests either a drafting error or an intentional omission with no apparent logical basis.
The Act states it is 'current from 1 September 2005 to date (accessed 3 April 2026 at 15:29)' but also states 'File last modified 30 October 2019'. If the file was last modified in 2019, the claim that it is current 'to date' as of 2026 is procedurally unfounded without any substantive amendment being visible.
An 1895 Act purports to define 'standard time' for Tasmania, yet no substantive operative provisions are reproduced in this version. The Act consists entirely of metadata, status information, and navigational headers with zero normative content visible. An Act with no operative text cannot perform any legal function.
The document is described as 'Current version for 19 September 2025 to date (accessed 5 April 2026 at 16:04)' — meaning the system is reporting an access date of 5 April 2026, which is a future date relative to any realistic drafting or publication context, yet purports to describe a currently-in-force instrument. While not logically impossible, this raises questions about the temporal validity claims of the 'current' version descriptor.
Zone SP4 is recorded as inserted by 2021 (650), Sch 1[13] AND ALSO amended by 2022 (726), Sch 1[4][10]. However, the insertion note itself references '2022 (726), Sch 1[4][10]' as part of the insertion entry rather than as a separate amendment, creating ambiguity as to whether the zone existed in any valid form between insertion in 2021 and amendment in 2022, or whether the insertion itself was only completed by the 2022 instrument.
Clause 5.5 was repealed in 2018 and then re-inserted in 2020 with the same clause number. The history note records 'Rep 2018 (105), Sch 1 [2]. Ins 2020 (762), Sch 1[3].' This means the clause that exists today is substantively a different provision wearing the same number as the repealed one, creating ambiguity about which version of cl 5.5 is referenced by instruments or decisions made between 2018 and 2020 when no cl 5.5 existed.
Clause 5.9 was repealed by 2017 (453) and then re-inserted by 2021 (301). Like cl 5.5, the re-inserted provision is a substantively new clause occupying the number of a repealed one. Any instrument or consent condition referencing cl 5.9 between 2017 and 2021 referenced a non-existent provision.
The provision purports to bind the Commonwealth and other States only 'in so far as the legislative power of the State permits', but a State legislature has no legislative power to bind the Commonwealth or other States. The qualification effectively renders the binding of the Commonwealth and other States a legal nullity.
Section 9(2) creates a near-irrebuttable presumption that any document 'purporting' to be a certificate is valid unless the contrary is proved, but section 9(1) already requires an 'authorised person' to give the certificate. The combination means a fraudulently produced document purporting to be a certificate must be treated as valid unless disproved, placing an impossible evidential burden on the party challenging it.
5 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
Section 69D applies Parts 6 and 6A to any entity that acquires 'all, or substantially all, of Suncorp's Australian business', treating that entity as if it were Suncorp. This includes the obligation under s.64 for the constitution to 'at all times' require Queensland-based operations and under s.69B to maintain ASIC registration. However, the acquiring entity may be a foreign corporation or a trust not capable of having a 'constitution' in the relevant sense, rendering compliance structurally impossible.
Section 5(f) defines a State financial institution (SFI) to include 'a company formed for holding some or all of the issued share capital, assets or liabilities of 1 or more of the entities mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (e)'. Paragraph (e) itself defines an SFI as a wholly-owned subsidiary of entities in (a)-(d). This creates a potentially recursive definition where a holding company of a subsidiary-SFI is itself an SFI, which could then generate further SFIs ad infinitum through the interaction of (e) and (f).
6 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
Schedule 8 expressly directed the SEPP No 36 (Manufactured Home Estates) provisions to be inserted as Chapter 3, Part 7. The provisions were instead inserted as Chapter 3, Part 8. The operative instruction in the Schedule directly contradicts the structure of the instrument as enacted.
Schedule 8 expressly directed the SEPP No 21 (Caravan Parks) provisions to be inserted as Chapter 3, Part 8. The provisions were instead inserted as Chapter 3, Part 9. Again, the operative Schedule instruction contradicts the actual enacted structure of the Policy.
The suspension notice must state when the suspension 'starts and ends', but the commissioner may subsequently extend the period before it ends — meaning the stated end date in the original notice is not the actual end date, undermining the purpose of requiring the end date to be stated.
The SES chief officer may arrange with 'the commissioner' for police secondments, but the seconded police officers are then subject to the direction of the SES chief officer — creating an arrangement where the chief officer negotiates with their own superior to obtain officers who then report to the chief officer, not the commissioner.
13 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
A deadline of 30 June 2024 is imposed for completion of project works by SunWater, but the regulation was inserted in 2023 and this analysis is being conducted after that date — the mandatory deadline is already retrospectively impossible to comply with for future actors discovering this obligation.
The definition of 'reserved works' in Division 3 is self-referentially circular — it defines reserved works as works that 'can be carried out only with the exercise of a power the Coordinator-General may exercise under the Act only for or in connection with works undertaken by the Coordinator-General', which presupposes that the Coordinator-General is already undertaking the works to determine whether they are reserved works.
8 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
Acting Deputy Coordinator-General appointment capped at 3 months with no extension permitted, yet the triggering vacancy may be indefinite
Minister must consult the Coordinator-General before appointing an acting Deputy, but the Coordinator-General may themselves be absent or incapacitated
12 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
The transitional provision applies to a regulation described as 'expired', yet provides no mechanism, date, or criteria by which a document author or reader can determine when or why the 2009 Regulation expired. The phrase 'if the context permits' introduces subjective discretion into a legal instrument without any guiding standard, making compliance or reliance effectively indeterminate.
Section 3 states the declaration rule as an unnumbered paragraph and then restates it identically as a formally numbered subsection (sec.3-ssec.1). Both provisions purport to declare the same areas as State development areas under the same authority (s.77(1) of the Act), creating a potential double declaration of the same legal effect with no reconciling provision.
1 more generated issue for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
The identical currency statement ('Version current from 1 September 2005 to date (accessed 3 April 2026 at 15:29)') and associated headings are duplicated verbatim multiple times throughout the document. Statutory instruments with duplicated operative language risk creating interpretive uncertainty about which instance is authoritative.
The version is claimed to be current as of 3 April 2026, implying ongoing authoritative maintenance, yet the underlying file was last modified on 30 October 2019 — over six years earlier. These two representations are in tension: either the file has been updated (in which case the modification date is wrong) or it has not been updated (in which case the 'current to date' claim is misleading).
Zones C1–C4 are described as 'previously Zone E1–E4' and renumbered by 2021 (650). However, Zone E5 was inserted by the same 2021 (650) instrument. This means the 2021 instrument simultaneously abolished the E-zone numbering series (by renumbering E1–E4 to C1–C4) while also creating a new zone using the E-series prefix (E5), resulting in a single remaining zone carrying a prefix series that was otherwise abandoned. Zone E5 was not subsequently renumbered to align with the C-series.
The 2021 (650) instrument repealed all B-zones (B1–B8) and all IN-zones (IN1–IN4) via Schedule 3[2], while simultaneously inserting Zone E5, Zone MU1, Zone SP4, Zone W4, and renumbering E1–E4 as C1–C4. This creates a structural absurdity: the instrument that dismantles one complete naming series (Business and Industrial zones) also introduces a new zone (E5) into a series (Environmental) that it is simultaneously converting to C-series nomenclature.
4 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.
Clause 5.9AA was inserted in 2011 and repealed in 2017 alongside the original cl 5.9. When cl 5.9 was re-inserted in 2021, cl 5.9AA was not re-inserted. This orphans any operational cross-references from surviving instruments that depended on cl 5.9AA existing alongside cl 5.9.
The 2021 (650) amendment simultaneously (a) repealed all B zones (B1–B8) and all IN zones (IN1–IN4) via Sch 3[2], and (b) renumbered the E zones as C zones (E1→C1, E2→C2, E3→C3, E4→C4) via Sch 1[14]–[20], while inserting new zones E5 and MU1. The result is that 'E' zones no longer exist in their original form but a new 'E5' zone is inserted — meaning the 'E' series is now non-contiguous (E5 exists; E1–E4 do not), which is logically absurd numbering.
7 more generated issues for this Act are cached, but not expanded on the catalogue page.