BORROLOOLA COMMUNITY GOVERNMENT COUNCIL (GARBAGE AND REMOVAL AND DESTRUCTION OF ANIMALS) BY-LAWS 1989

“Garbage” is defined broadly in by-law 3 to include all kinds of litter, rubbish, refuse and discarded or waste material or matter. This sweeping definition leaves little room for exclusion; almost any unwanted material produced on land will fall within the scope of the garbage service. “Animal” includes every species of quadruped and bird, so the by-laws cover domestic pets, livestock, and wildlife. “Public place” is defined as any place to which the public or a section of the public have or are permitted access, whether on payment or otherwise, which includes roads, parks, and commercial premises open to the public. “Authorised officer” is any person authorised by the council for the purposes of the By-laws; the By-laws do not prescribe any qualifications or safeguards for that authorisation. “Land” includes premises, so the duties apply to commercial and residential occupiers alike.

The garbage service is split into two tiers. By-law 4 obliges the council to provide a basic collection and removal service for garbage other than bulk garbage. By-law 5 allows the council to set a basic charge by resolution, which covers the collection of the contents of two receptacles twice each week. By-law 6 permits the council to provide a separate service for garbage in bulk, on application by an owner or occupier and payment of a charge determined by the council. The latter is discretionary (the council “may” provide it), whereas the basic service is mandatory.

The concept of an “owner” of an animal is central to Part III. By-law 15 allows the council to recover expenses from the “owner” of the animal. But by-law 16 deems the occupier of land on which an animal or dead animal is found to be its owner, unless that occupier denies ownership. This shifts the burden of proof onto the occupier to rebut the deeming, and operates even where the true owner is unknown or unidentifiable. The concept of “animal at large” in a public place is not exhaustively defined; the trigger is that the animal, if left at large, is likely to be a danger to the safety of members of the public. This gives the council a wide discretion to act pre‑emptively.

The By-laws primarily affect every occupier of land within the Borroloola community government area. An “occupier” is not defined in the By-laws but would ordinarily include a tenant, resident, or anyone in lawful possession. Each occupier must provide compliant rubbish bins, maintain them in good order, place all garbage in bins (except litter that may be burnt), wrap wet garbage, place bins out for collection at the notified times and return them afterwards, and cleanse each bin with antiseptic at least once every four weeks. These are ongoing, cost‑bearing obligations that apply regardless of the amount of garbage generated or the occupier’s financial circumstances. Owners and occupiers of land may also apply for bulk garbage removal, but the council controls whether and at what price that service is provided.

Animal owners within the area are directly affected by Part III. The council can issue a written notice requiring the immediate destruction, removal or disposal of a diseased or injured animal, or an animal at large in a public place that is likely to be a danger. The owner must comply. If the council acts without notice in urgent cases (by-law 13), the owner may lose the animal before having any opportunity to object or to treat the animal. The council may recover expenses from the owner, which could include the cost of destruction, removal, or disposal. Because of the deeming provision in by-law 16, an occupier who is not the true owner of an animal found on the land may still be liable for those expenses unless they deny ownership promptly.

The council itself is affected as the body obliged to provide the garbage service (by-law 4) and given extensive powers to enter land, remove animals, and recover costs. Its authorised officers can exercise those powers, but the By-laws do not require the council to indemnify occupiers for damage caused during entry or removal. Contractors and servants of the council acting within their duties are exempt from the prohibition on interfering with rubbish bins. Members of the public generally may not touch, use, remove, mark, damage or otherwise interfere with rubbish bins unless they fall within one of the three exceptions in by-law 8.

The most detailed duties fall on occupiers of land regarding rubbish bins (by-law 7). Each occupier must provide one or more removable bins, each with a maximum capacity of 85 litres, that are moisture proof, vermin proof, fitted with a close‑fitting lid and handles. The occupier must maintain each bin in good order and condition, not permit it to attract flying insects or vermin, become unsightly, cause offensive odour, become a danger to public health, or interfere with the comfort of persons in neighbouring land. The lid must be kept closely fitted except when adding or removing garbage. All garbage produced on the land must be placed in a bin, except that litter capable of being destroyed by fire may be lawfully burnt (by-law 7(2)). Wet garbage must be effectively wrapped before being placed in the bin. If an authorised officer or council order requires, the occupier must indelibly mark the bin’s lid and body with the lot number, the occupier’s name, and any other information required. On the days and times notified by the council, the occupier must place each bin on the footpath outside the land (or immediately inside the boundary if clearly visible and accessible), and after collection, replace the bin on the land. Each bin must be thoroughly cleansed with antiseptic at least once every four weeks.

The council’s duties are narrower. It must provide a garbage collection and removal service for garbage other than bulk garbage, and publish details on its notice board and in a local newspaper. It may set the basic charge by resolution. It may also provide bulk removal on application. The council has a discretionary power to enter private land, remove or destroy animals, and dispose of them. It may recover expenses from the owner. The council must not unreasonably require the destruction of an animal in a notice under by-law 10(2). However, that qualification does not apply when the council acts without notice under by-law 13.

Occupiers and owners have limited rights. An occupier may burn litter that is capable of being burnt (by-law 7(2)). An owner of an animal receives a written notice before the council requires destruction, removal or disposal, and the destruction must not be unreasonably required. But there is no right to be heard before the notice is issued, no right of appeal, and no right to compensation if an animal is destroyed without notice. The deeming provision in by-law 16 gives an occupier a right to deny ownership, but the By-laws do not prescribe the form or timing of that denial. A person who is not the occupier, a council servant, or a contractor is prohibited from interfering with rubbish bins, which creates a correlative right for the occupier to have their bins left alone.

By-law 18 provides that a person who contravenes or fails to comply with the By-laws is guilty of an offence. The penalty is $200. This is a single fixed sum; it does not increase for continuing offences or scale with the seriousness of the breach. Given the By-laws date from 1989 and the penalty has not been amended, $200 in 2025 dollars is significantly lower in real terms, reducing the deterrent effect. The penalty applies to both the detailed garbage duties (failing to wrap wet garbage, failing to clean bins every four weeks, failing to place bins out for collection) and the animal duties (failing to comply with a destruction notice, failing to notify the council of a dead animal on private land). There is no defence of reasonable excuse, necessity, or proportionality in the offence provision. A strict‑liability interpretation is likely. By-law 17 creates a separate specific offence of obstructing, hindering or impeding an authorised officer or a person acting in good faith assisting them, in the exercise of their powers or performance of functions. The same $200 penalty applies.

Enforcement is left to the council and its authorised officers. The By-laws do not authorise the issue of infringement notices (on‑the‑spot fines) or provide for a court‑based prosecution process beyond the general reference to an offence. The council may also recover expenses from the owner of an animal (by-law 15) as a civil debt, which does not require a criminal conviction. That recovery mechanism is separate from the offence penalty. An authorised officer may enter private land to remove or destroy an animal (by‑laws 13 and 12(2)). The By-laws do not require a warrant, court order, or any independent oversight for such entry. This creates a significant enforcement power exercisable without judicial authorisation. There is no provision for review of enforcement decisions, no obligation on the council to give reasons, and no compensation for property damage or loss of animals caused by enforcement action, except that a destruction notice must not be unreasonable (a weak constraint that is unlikely to generate liability, especially if urgency is claimed).

The By-laws are made under the Local Government Act 2008 (NT) and must be consistent with that Act. If the Local Government Act contains provisions about making by‑laws, charging for services, or entering land, those provisions may impose limitations not apparent from the By‑laws text alone. Section 57 of the Interpretation Act 1978 is expressly disapplied by by-law 19(1), meaning the By‑laws do not need to be published in the Gazette, although copies must be available for inspection at the council office. This interaction reduces the formality of notification and may affect constructive notice to the public.

Part III of the By‑laws intersects with animal welfare legislation, particularly the Animal Welfare Act 2010 (NT). That Act prohibits cruelty and unnecessary suffering. The By‑laws empower the council to destroy animals, including diseased or injured ones, but do not require that destruction be carried out humanely or by a veterinary practitioner. If a destruction method causes unnecessary pain, it could contravene the Animal Welfare Act, creating a conflict between the powers under the By‑laws and the duties under that Act. The council must therefore comply with both; the By‑laws do not override superior welfare legislation. Similarly, the power to enter private land under by‑laws 12(2) and 13 may interact with the right to privacy and property rights at common law and possibly with the Local Government Act’s own entry provisions. No warrant is required by the By‑laws, which might be challenged if entry is resisted on common law or statutory grounds.

Public health legislation, such as the Public and Environmental Health Act 2011 (NT), may impose separate obligations regarding the storage and disposal of garbage and the harbouring of vermin. Compliance with the By‑laws does not automatically mean compliance with that Act; an occupier who keeps bins in good condition under by-law 7 may still face health‑related enforcement if odour or vermin issues persist. Conversely, the By‑laws give the council powers to address nuisances (e.g., unsightly bins, offensive odour, animals at large) that could overlap with public health enforcement, potentially creating duplication or inconsistent approaches within the same council.

The By‑laws do not confer immunity from other laws. Contractual arrangements for garbage services, if any private operator were involved, would be subject to competition and consumer law. However, the By‑laws establish a council monopoly over basic garbage collection; no alternative provider is recognised. This interaction may raise competition concerns, but the Local Government Act likely authorises such exclusivity.

The By‑laws were notified on 30 June 1989 and commenced on the same day. They were made as subordinate legislation under the Local Government Act 2008 (according to the reprint header), though that Act post‑dates the By‑laws; the original enabling Act was likely the Local Government Act 1978 or its predecessor, with the reference to the 2008 Act reflecting a reprint update. The endnotes record only one general amendment: the Interpretation Legislation Amendment Act 2018 (Act No. 22 of 2018) made formal amendments of a formal nature to by‑laws 1 and 19. These were likely minor changes to update legislative references or formatting. No substantive amendments have been made to the garbage duties, bin specifications, animal removal powers, penalty amount, or any other operative provision. The penalty of $200 has remained unchanged since 1989, meaning its real value has eroded substantially due to inflation. The bin capacity limit of 85 litres, the twice‑weekly collection frequency, the antiseptic cleansing requirement, and the notice‑board publication method all reflect 1989 practices and may be out of step with modern waste management standards. The lack of amendment history suggests the By‑laws have received little attention from the council or the legislature over more than three decades, raising questions about their ongoing relevance and enforceability. Users should verify whether the By‑laws are still in force and whether any local government reorganisation (such as the amalgamation of community government councils) has affected their application to the Borroloola area.

The endnotes and the text of the By‑laws do not reference any litigation. This is unsurprising given the small population of the Borroloola community government area and the relatively minor nature of the regulatory subject matter. No reported Northern Territory or High Court cases addressing these By‑laws are identified in the source. Potential legal challenges could have arisen around the reasonableness of destruction notices (by-law 10(2)), the lawfulness of entry onto private land without a warrant (by‑laws 12(2) and 13), the deeming of an occupier as owner (by‑law 16), or the strictness of the offence provisions (by‑law 18). For example, a defending occupier might argue that a forfeiture of an animal or a cost recovery demand is invalid if the council failed to act reasonably. However, the absence of recorded cases suggests either that the By‑laws are enforced only informally, that disputes are resolved without litigation, or that the penalties are too small to justify court proceedings. Practitioners advising clients in the Borroloola area should not assume that the By‑laws have been tested or interpreted by a court; legislative ambiguity remains unresolved.

The deeming provision in by‑law 16 is a trap for occupiers. An occupier on whose land a dead or live animal is found is automatically deemed to be its owner for Part III purposes, unless they deny ownership. The By‑laws do not specify when, how, or to whom that denial must be made. If a neighbour’s dog dies on your property, you could be liable for the council’s removal and disposal expenses unless you act promptly to disclaim ownership. There is no de minimis threshold; a single stray bird could trigger the provision.

The council’s power to destroy animals without notice under by‑law 13 is broad. The only precondition is that the animal is dead, diseased, or injured, or is at large in a public place and likely to be a danger to safety. There is no requirement that the danger be imminent, that alternative methods (e.g., impounding) be attempted first, or that the owner be given an opportunity to reclaim the animal. The council may also enter private land for that purpose without a warrant. This creates a risk of mistaken identity (destroying a healthy pet) or disproportionate action.

The bin specification in by‑law 7(1)(a) requires a capacity of “not more than 85 litres”. This is a maximum, not a minimum, and an occupier who uses a smaller bin still complies. However, the council’s basic charge only covers the collection of two receptacles twice weekly. If an occupier produces more garbage than fits in two 85‑litre bins, the excess will not be collected under the basic service, potentially forcing the occupier to seek bulk removal (if the council offers it) or to store garbage, which may lead to odour or vermin issues and a breach of the maintenance duty.

The requirement to cleanse each bin “thoroughly with antiseptic not less than once in each 4 week period” (by‑law 7(1)(h)) is specific and potentially costly. Antiseptic is not defined, and the council may take a strict view of “thoroughly”. Failure to comply is a $200 offence, even if the bin is otherwise clean. This duty is ongoing and applies to every occupied premises, regardless of whether the bin is actually used.

The publication method in by‑law 4 requires the council to publish details of the garbage service on its notice board and from time to time in a newspaper circulating generally in the area. There is no obligation to notify each occupier individually. An occupier who fails to monitor the notice board or the newspaper may miss the notified collection days and times, and then be in breach for failing to place bins out. Ignorance is no defence under the strict‑liability offence provision.

The bulk removal service under by‑law 6 is discretionary. The council “may” provide it, and if it does, the charge is set by resolution. There is no obligation to provide the service at all, which may leave occupiers with large items (furniture, green waste) with no legal means of disposal other than illegal dumping, which itself would be a breach of the garbage‑in‑bin requirement.

An occupier of land in the Borroloola community government area should first obtain one or more removable rubbish bins complying with by‑law 7(1)(a) - capacity not more than 85 litres, moisture proof, vermin proof, close‑fitting lid, handles. The bin must be maintained in good order, kept clean, and not allowed to attract vermin, become unsightly, cause odour, or become a health danger. All garbage produced on the land (other than litter that may be lawfully burnt) must be placed in the bin, with wet garbage effectively wrapped. The lid must be kept on except when adding or removing garbage.

The occupier must monitor the council’s notice board and local newspaper for details of the garbage collection service, including the days and times for bin placement. On those days, the occupier must place each bin on the footpath outside the land, or if not possible, immediately inside the boundary in a position clearly visible and conveniently reached from the road. The clerk may approve an alternative position in special circumstances. After collection, the occupier must replace the bin on the land and ensure the lid is tight. At least once every four weeks, the bin must be thoroughly cleansed with an antiseptic. If the council or an authorised officer requires, the bin must be indelibly marked with the lot number, the occupier’s name, and any other specified information.

If an animal dies on the occupier’s private land, the occupier must either dispose of the carcass themselves or notify the council clerk as soon as practicable (by‑law 12(1)). If a diseased or injured animal is present, or an animal at large in a public place is likely to be a danger, the occupier (if also the owner) should comply immediately with any written notice from the council requiring destruction or removal. If the council acts without notice, the occupier should be prepared to pay any expenses incurred and to lodge a denial of ownership under by‑law 16 if they are not the true owner, to avoid cost recovery.

The occupier must not interfere with any other person’s rubbish bin. Servants, agents, council staff, and contractors acting within their duties are exempt, but ordinary occupiers have no right to touch, use, remove, mark, damage or otherwise interfere with bins that are not their own. Compliance also means not obstructing, hindering or impeding an authorised officer in the exercise of their powers.

Given the strict‑liability offence and the $200 penalty, the safest approach is to maintain written records of bin cleaning dates, keep proof of bin purchase and specifications, and retain any correspondence with the council about placement or charges. If a dispute arises about a destruction notice or cost recovery, legal advice should be sought promptly, particularly regarding the reasonableness requirement in by‑law 10(2) and the validity of any entry onto private land.