{"id":"tas:sr-2002-001","name":"Traffic (Prescribed Detection Devices) Notice 2002","slug":"traffic-prescribed-detection-devices-notice-2002","collection":"regulation","jurisdiction":"tas","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"1 of 2002","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":318499,"registerId":"tas-tas:sr-2002-001-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-08","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Short title","content":"### 1 Short title\n\n> This notice may be cited as the [Traffic (Prescribed Detection Devices) Notice 2002](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/sr-2002-001) .","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Commencement","content":"### 2 Commencement\n\n> This notice takes effect on the day on which its making is notified in the *Gazette*.","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Declaration of prescribed detection device","content":"### 3 Declaration of prescribed detection device\n\n> The following devices are declared to be photographic detection devices for the purposes of the [Traffic Act 1925](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1925-038) :\n> \n> > > (a) LaserCam Plus Digital Recording Device;\n> > \n> > > (b) Truvelo M4 MPC speed measuring device integrated with a LaserCam Plus Digital Camera Recording Device.\n\nDisplayed and numbered in accordance with the *[Rules Publication Act 1953](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1953-050)*.\n\nNotified in the *Gazette* on 6 February 2002\n\nThis notice is administered in the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources.","sortOrder":2}],"analysis":{"summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Based on the available information, the notice appears to have retained its original and narrow purpose: prescribing which detection devices are legally approved for use in traffic enforcement in Tasmania. Amendments are noted but the core function does not appear to have expanded beyond its original intent."},"complexity_factors":["Very narrow, technical subject matter — simply prescribing approved devices","The actual substantive content (the list of devices) is not reproduced in the provided text, limiting full analysis","Operates as a subordinate instrument (a notice under a parent Act), adding a minor layer of legislative hierarchy to understand","Has been amended over time, meaning the current approved list may differ from the original 2002 version"],"plain_english_summary":"This Tasmanian notice formally lists which camera and detection devices (e.g., speed and red‑light cameras) are legally approved for detecting traffic offences. \n\nIt matters to drivers, police, and courts: enforcement relies on devices being on this prescribed list, or evidence may be challenged, so the notice provides the legal foundation that validates camera‑based traffic enforcement in Tasmania."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The notice does not alter the substantive powers or penalties in the Traffic Act 1925; it only specifies which devices qualify as photographic detection devices under that Act (s3). Commencement and administration are procedural (s2 and administrative note)."},"complexity_factors":["Single substantive declaration: list of two devices only (s3) — minimal textual complexity.","Commencement depends solely on Gazette notification (s2) — no phased or conditional triggers.","Relies on external statute for legal effect: must be read with the Traffic Act 1925 (cross-reference increases practical complexity for users).","No operational or technical standards included — implementation detail and enforcement practice are left to administering authorities.","Administrative clarity: notice names the administering department, limiting institutional ambiguity."],"plain_english_summary":"This notice names two specific products — LaserCam Plus Digital Recording Device and Truvelo M4 MPC integrated with a LaserCam Plus camera — as \"photographic detection devices\" for the purposes of the Traffic Act 1925 (s3). It takes effect on notification in the Gazette (s2) and is administered by the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources. It matters to persons and bodies regulated under the Traffic Act because it specifies which technologies may be treated as authorised detection devices under that Act."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":1,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This notice performs exactly the narrow, technical function it was designed for: adding specific speed detection devices to the approved list under the Traffic Act 1925. There is no scope creep — it declares two devices and stops."},"complexity_factors":["Extremely short — only 3 operative sections","No defined terms section","No cross-references to other legislation beyond the parent Act citation","Simple declarative structure: 'The following devices are declared...'","No conditional logic, exceptions, or procedural requirements","Essentially a two-item list with legal effect"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this does:**\n\nThis notice officially approves two specific speed detection devices for use under Tasmania's Traffic Act 1925. It declares that police or traffic authorities can legally use:\n\n- **LaserCam Plus Digital Recording Device**\n- **Truvelo M4 MPC speed measuring device** (when combined with the LaserCam Plus camera)\n\n**Who it affects:**\n\n- **Motorists in Tasmania** — these are the devices that can be used to detect speeding and issue fines\n- **Police and traffic enforcement officers** — they now have clear legal authority to use these specific devices\n- **Courts** — photographic evidence from these devices becomes admissible in traffic proceedings\n\n**Why it matters:**\n\nWithout this notice, speed camera evidence from these devices could be challenged in court. By \"prescribing\" (officially approving) them, the government ensures:\n- Speeding fines based on these devices are legally valid\n- Drivers can't escape penalties by arguing the device wasn't authorised\n- There's transparency about what technology is being used to enforce traffic laws\n\nThis is a technical but important piece of the legal framework that makes automated speed enforcement work."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/traffic-prescribed-detection-devices-notice-2002","history":"/api/acts/traffic-prescribed-detection-devices-notice-2002/history","analysis":"/api/acts/traffic-prescribed-detection-devices-notice-2002/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/traffic-prescribed-detection-devices-notice-2002/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/traffic-prescribed-detection-devices-notice-2002/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/traffic-prescribed-detection-devices-notice-2002/documents"}}