Criminal Code (Infringement Notices) Regulations 2015

The regulations operate by reference to three statutory building blocks: the Criminal Code (the substantive offences), the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2 (the infringement notice regime), and the administrative controls within the regulations themselves concerning who may issue notices and when they may not be used.

Prescribed offences and modified penalties. Regulation 4(1) and Schedule 1 convert selected Criminal Code offences into offences for which an infringement notice may be issued under the CP Act Part 2. Schedule 1 lists six offence provisions from the Criminal Code, and immediately opposite each it sets the modified penalty, which is declared to be the modified penalty for the purposes of CP Act section 5(3) (regulation 4(2)). The listed offences are:

• s 70A(2) trespassing;
• s 74A(2) behaving in a disorderly manner (either in a public place or in a police station/lock-up);
• s 172(2) obstructing a public officer or person lawfully assisting a public officer;
• s 378 stealing anything capable of being stolen;
• s 417(1) possessing anything reasonably suspected to be stolen or unlawfully obtained; and
• s 445 destroying or damaging property. Each has a modified penalty of $500 (Schedule 1).

Exclusion rules. Regulation 5 sets four distinct factual circumstances in which an infringement notice cannot be issued for an offence in Schedule 1, thereby preserving alternative procedures in those circumstances. The exclusions are:

• where, on the date the alleged offence is believed to have been committed, the alleged offender was under 17 years of age (regulation 5(a));
• where the alleged offence is s 378 (stealing) and the value of the thing alleged to have been stolen exceeds $500 (regulation 5(b));
• where the alleged offence is s 417(1) (possession of suspected stolen property) and the value of the thing alleged to have been in the possession of the alleged offender exceeds $500 (regulation 5(c)); and
• where the alleged offence is s 445 (destroying or damaging property) and the value of the property alleged to have been destroyed or damaged exceeds $500 (regulation 5(d)). These limits are expressed as exceptions to the availability of CP Act Part 2 infringement notices for those specified factual scenarios.

Issuing and approving officers. Regulation 6 distinguishes between authorised officers and approved officers in relation to CP Act Part 2. Every police officer other than a senior police officer is an authorised officer (regulation 6(1)), and may show their Certificate of Authority as evidence of entitlement to issue infringement notices (regulation 6(2)). Every senior police officer is an approved officer (regulation 6(3)). The Commissioner of Police has a delegated power to appoint non‑police persons, in writing, as approved officers (regulation 6(4)), and such appointments may be confined to particular CP Act functions (sections 9(1)(f)(iii), 14 or 15) or particular persons or classes (regulation 6(5)).

Forms and procedural content. Regulation 7 prescribes Form 1 (the infringement notice) and Form 2 (withdrawal of infringement notice) as the prescribed forms for CP Act Part 2 purposes. Schedule 2 sets the content of those forms. Form 1 contains a clear instruction that payment of the modified penalty within 28 days will avoid prosecution, that payment is not an admission for any civil or criminal proceeding, and that if unpaid within 28 days prosecution or enforcement action under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 may follow. The form gives an alternative: an alleged offender who prefers prosecution in court may sign and return the notice within 28 days to elect court proceedings. Form 2 records withdrawal of an infringement notice and provides for refund if the modified penalty has been paid.

References to other instruments and definitions. Regulation 3 supplies defined terms used in the regulations and links to terms defined in other instruments. For example, Certificate of Authority is given the meaning in the Police Force Regulations 1979 regulation 901A; Commissioner of Police and CP Act are defined by reference; senior police officer is given the meaning in the Criminal Investigation Act 2006 s 3(1). The regulations therefore rely on definitions and provisions in other instruments to determine who may act under the infringement notice regime.

Commencement and amendment history. The regulations commence when the Criminal Code Amendment (Infringement Notices) Act 2011 (other than sections 1 and 2) commences (regulation 2). The compilation table records their initial publication in March 2015 and two amendment instruments in 2020 that altered Schedule 1 and the forms (SL 2020/110 and SL 2020/162).

In sum, the regulations are procedural instruments that graft a limited infringement‑notice option onto specific Criminal Code offences, fix a flat $500 modified penalty for each, restrict use of the notice where the accused is a minor or the alleged property value exceeds $500 for particular offences, allocate issuing powers to categories of police and appointed non‑police approved officers, and prescribe standard forms and related instructions.

The regulations create effects for four groups: alleged offenders, police officers and approved officers, prosecuting authorities/courts, and agencies that administer fines enforcement. The regulatory text identifies who is empowered to act and who bears the financial obligation when an infringement notice is issued.

Alleged offenders. The immediate and direct fiscal burden falls on persons alleged to have committed an offence listed in Schedule 1. Form 1 informs the alleged offender that they may avoid prosecution by paying the modified penalty of $500 within 28 days after the date of issue (Schedule 2, Form 1). The form also provides an alternative procedural right to elect prosecution in court by signing and posting the notice within 28 days (Schedule 2, Form 1). The regulations themselves set age‑based limits: where, on the date of the alleged offence, the alleged offender was under 17, an infringement notice cannot be issued (regulation 5(a)). Thus the regime does not place a direct infringement‑notice payment option on persons who were under 17 at the time of the alleged offending; such matters must proceed by other means.

Police officers and approved officers. The regulations determine which officers may issue infringement notices. Every police officer, other than a senior police officer, is an authorised officer for the CP Act Part 2 purposes (regulation 6(1)). These authorised police officers may show a Certificate of Authority to demonstrate their power to issue notices (regulation 6(2)). Senior police officers are approved officers (regulation 6(3)) and therefore occupy a different nominal status in the scheme. The Commissioner of Police may appoint, in writing, persons who are not police officers to be approved officers for specified CP Act functions and in respect of specified persons or classes (regulation 6(4)-(5)). The practical effect is that the day‑to‑day issuing power rests with ordinary police officers but the Commissioner may broaden the pool of approvers to include non‑police persons for particular CP Act functions, subject to the requirements in regulation 6(5).

Prosecuting authorities and courts. The regulations move particular low‑value or relatively summary Criminal Code matters out of immediate court prosecution (by providing an alternative infringement notice pathway). Where an alleged offender declines to pay the modified penalty and the infringement notice period lapses, the Form 1 warns that the person "may be prosecuted in court for the alleged offence or enforcement action may be taken under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 to recover the modified penalty" (Schedule 2, Form 1). The regulators do not specify how prosecutorial charging decisions will change, but the mechanics are that a non‑payment makes court prosecution available.

Fines enforcement agencies. The enforcement consequences for non‑payment are spelled out in Form 1 by reference to the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994. The form lists possible enforcement actions that may be taken under that Act, for example driver’s licence suspension, vehicle licence actions, immobilisation, garnishee orders, seizure and sale of property, and publication of the person’s details (Schedule 2, Form 1). These actions shift collection activity and consequential burdens to the fines enforcement system rather than the criminal court system, and therefore affect agencies responsible for levy collection and enforcement.

Third parties and institutions. Other parties are affected indirectly. Employers or banks may experience garnishee orders or intelligence from fines enforcement action that flow from unpaid modified penalties (Schedule 2, Form 1). Police stations and administrative units must process payment methods described on the form and manage refunds where notices are withdrawn (Schedule 2, Form 2).

Administrators of the system. The Commissioner of Police is empowered to make written appointments of non‑police approved officers and therefore exercises a governance role (regulation 6(4)). Police stations and officers are required to use prescribed forms (regulation 7), maintain Certificate of Authority records, and to ensure that the factual conditions that bar issuing (regulation 5) are identified before issuing a notice.

Location‑ and offence‑specific effects. The Schedule lists offences that frequently occur in public places or in encounters with police: trespass, disorderly conduct in public or police stations, obstructing public officers, low‑value stealing, possession of suspected stolen property, and property damage. The design therefore affects everyday policing encounters where summary disposal via an infringement notice is operationally convenient. However the exclusions in regulation 5 remove that option for juveniles and for higher‑value theft/damage matters, steering those cases back towards court processes.

In short, persons alleged to have committed the listed offences are the ones most directly exposed to a $500 modified penalty and the statutory 28‑day payment rule (Schedule 2, Form 1); police officers are the primary actors entitled to issue notices (regulation 6); the Commissioner has appointment power for non‑police approved officers (regulation 6(4)); and fines enforcement agencies are given the back‑end enforcement work should modified penalties remain unpaid (Schedule 2, Form 1).

The regulations create a set of limited duties on officers and rights for alleged offenders. They do not themselves create procedural steps beyond issuance and withdrawal forms, but they anchor specific obligations and choices into the infringement‑notice mechanism.

Duties on issuing officers. An authorised officer (a police officer who is not a senior police officer, reg 6(1)), or an approved officer (senior police officer or a person appointed by the Commissioner in writing, reg 6(3)-(4)), must use the prescribed Form 1 when issuing an infringement notice (regulation 7(a) and Schedule 2, Form 1). The officer must complete the fields set out in Form 1: alleged offender details, description of the alleged offence, the Criminal Code section, date/time/place, modified penalty, officer’s name and registered number, police station, and date of issue (Schedule 2, Form 1). Authorised officers can show their Certificate of Authority as proof of authorisation to issue (regulation 6(2)). If the officer later withdraws the notice, the officer must use Form 2 and complete the stipulated fields (regulation 7(b) and Schedule 2, Form 2). The regulations do not spell out evidentiary thresholds for issuance, but the officer must respect the scenarios in regulation 5 in which notices cannot be issued.

Duty to observe exclusion criteria. Before issuing a notice the officer must identify whether any of the regulation 5 exclusion circumstances apply. The officer must not issue an infringement notice under CP Act Part 2 for a Schedule 1 offence if the alleged offender was under 17 on the alleged offence date (regulation 5(a)), or if the relevant property value exceeds $500 for s 378, s 417(1) or s 445 matters (regulation 5(b)-(d)). These are mandatory "cannot be issued" rules expressed in regulation 5.

Rights of alleged offenders. Form 1 explicitly sets out two alternatives for the alleged offender: pay the modified penalty within 28 days to avoid prosecution, or elect prosecution by signing and returning the notice within 28 days (Schedule 2, Form 1). The notice also expressly states that payment "will not be regarded as an admission for the purposes of any civil or criminal court case" (Schedule 2, Form 1). If the notice is paid and later withdrawn under Form 2, the withdrawal form provides that the paid amount will be refunded (Schedule 2, Form 2). These provisions create formal rights to choose between summary disposal and court proceedings, and a refund right on withdrawal.

Administrative duties relating to appointment and evidence of authority. Senior police officers are statutorily approved officers and persons appointed in writing by the Commissioner are approved officers (regulation 6(3)-(4)). The Commissioner must make appointments in writing; the appointments may be limited to particular CP Act functions (regulation 6(5)). Authorised police officers should be able to produce their Certificate of Authority if requested to show they are entitled to issue notices (regulation 6(2)). The regulations impose procedural formality rather than substantive duties about charging standards.

Enforcement and consequential duties by other agencies. Form 1 expressly notifies the alleged offender that failure to pay the modified penalty within 28 days may result in prosecution or enforcement action under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994. That notice thus triggers the enforcement machinery and places a duty on fines enforcement authorities to exercise their statutory functions should the modified penalty remain unpaid. The regulations do not change the enforcement Act; they only put alleged offenders on notice that those enforcement options are available.

Recordkeeping and refund duty on withdrawal. When a notice is withdrawn using Form 2, Form 2 declares that an amount already paid will be refunded (Schedule 2, Form 2). That places an operational obligation on the issuing agency or a designated finance unit to process refunds where appropriate.

Limits on the use of the regimen. The regulations create rights for alleged offenders by identifying when notices cannot be used (regulation 5). That is a legal limit; officers have no power under these regulations to issue an infringement notice in a barred circumstance. That constraint has practical consequences for the route by which certain cases must be processed.

In summary, the key duties are: issuing officers must use the prescribed forms and must not issue notices where regulation 5 prohibits them; the Commissioner must make written appointments for non‑police approved officers; authorised officers should produce a Certificate of Authority if asserting entitlement to issue. The primary rights are: alleged offenders can avoid prosecution by paying within 28 days, can elect prosecution instead by returning the notice, payment is not an admission, and refunds are available if the notice is later withdrawn (Schedule 2, Forms 1-2).

The regulations set one substantive monetary figure , the modified penalty of $500 for each prescribed offence , and they channel non‑payment toward existing enforcement and prosecution mechanisms rather than creating new penalties. The regulations do not create criminal penalties beyond the existing Criminal Code offences; they provide an alternate pathway for resolving certain offences via a monetary modified penalty.

Modified penalties. Schedule 1 sets the modified penalty at $500 for each of the six listed offences (Schedule 1). Regulation 4(2) makes those amounts "the modified penalty for that offence for the purposes of the CP Act section 5(3)". The regulations therefore directly fix the amount to be demanded by way of an infringement notice.

Consequences of non‑payment. Form 1 (Schedule 2) notifies the alleged offender that if they do not pay the modified penalty within 28 days the matter "may be prosecuted in court for the alleged offence or enforcement action may be taken under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 to recover the modified penalty" (Schedule 2, Form 1). The form then lists a non‑exhaustive set of actions possible under that enforcement Act: suspension of driver’s licence, suspension or cancellation of vehicle licence, disqualification from holding or obtaining driver/vehicle licences, immobilisation of vehicles or removal of number plates, publication of details on a website, garnishment of earnings or bank accounts, and seizure and sale of property (Schedule 2, Form 1).

Interaction with fines enforcement regime. The regulations do not themselves operate the enforcement actions; they simply inform alleged offenders that the enforcement options in the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 may be used. In practice, this means unpaid modified penalties become financial debts susceptible to civil enforcement measures under the enforcement Act rather than remaining solely criminal processes. The regulations thereby transfer collection risk and administrative enforcement functions to the fines machinery.

Withdrawal and refund. Form 2 prescribes a withdrawal notice. It records that the infringement notice has been withdrawn and states that "If you have already paid the modified penalty for the alleged offence in accordance with the infringement notice, the amount will be refunded to you" (Schedule 2, Form 2). Thus an issued but subsequently withdrawn notice triggers refund obligations under administrative practice; the regulations provide the formality for that refund but do not prescribe the timeframes or mechanism for refunds beyond the statement in Form 2.

Limits on issuing to minors and high‑value property cases. Regulation 5 removes the infringement‑notice option where the alleged offender was under 17 at the time of the alleged offence, or if certain value thresholds for property exceed $500 in theft, possession, or damage matters (regulation 5). This restriction effectively preserves the court or juvenile procedures for those matters; the enforcement consequences of non‑payment applicable to infringement notices do not arise if an infringement notice cannot be issued in the first place.

No additional criminal penalties in the regulations. The regulations do not add to the criminal penalties prescribed in the Criminal Code for any of the listed offences. They only create a simplified, monetary disposal option. If the alleged offender elects prosecution or fails to pay, the underlying criminal penalty and costs provisions of the Criminal Code and the CP Act or the courts apply, but those substantive penalties are not stated here.

Administration of enforcement. The practical enforcement burden falls on fines enforcement agencies and on policing units responsible for issuing and, where applicable, withdrawing notices and arranging refunds (Schedule 2, Forms 1-2). The regulations give the Commissioner the capacity to appoint non‑police approved officers, which may affect who administratively handles certain CP Act functions (regulation 6(4)-(5)).

In conclusion, the regulations create a $500 modified penalty pathway for specific Criminal Code offences, notify alleged offenders of the 28‑day payment window and the consequences of non‑payment, and rely on the existing fines enforcement statute for collection. They also provide a refund mechanism on withdrawal. The regulations do not themselves alter the substantive criminal penalties prescribed by the Criminal Code.

These regulations function as an adjunct to several other statutes; they do not stand alone. The text repeatedly cross‑refers to the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (CP Act), the Criminal Code, the Police Force Regulations 1979, the Criminal Investigation Act 2006, and the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994. The regulations therefore operate by reference and interact procedurally with those instruments.

Primary interaction with the CP Act Part 2. The regulations make offences listed in Schedule 1 eligible for infringement notices "under the CP Act Part 2" (regulation 4(1)). Regulation 4(2) declares the modified penalty amounts to be "for the purposes of the CP Act section 5(3)". The regulations therefore feed into the CP Act’s infringement notice architecture: they do not recreate or replace CP Act Part 2; they prescribe which Criminal Code offences may be processed under it and the modified penalty for those offences. Any requirements, procedures, or judicial remedies contained in the CP Act Part 2 will apply to the notices issued under these regulations.

Reference to Criminal Code s 721(3)(b) and (c). Regulation 5 is expressly framed as limiting when infringement notices may be issued, citing "The Criminal Code s. 721(3)(b) and (c)" in the regulation heading. The regulation gives specific factual circumstances in which "an infringement notice cannot be issued under the CP Act Part 2 for an offence specified in Schedule 1". That cross‑reference indicates that the Criminal Code contains relevant constraints or cross‑checks about infringement notices; the regulations provide precise operational rules for those constraints for particular offences and circumstances.

Definitions drawn from other instruments. Regulation 3 imports defined terms from other instruments: Certificate of Authority is defined by the Police Force Regulations 1979 regulation 901A; senior police officer is defined by the Criminal Investigation Act 2006 s 3(1); Commissioner of Police is defined by the Police Act 1892; CP Act is defined to mean the Criminal Procedure Act 2004. The regulations therefore depend on those other instruments to define who may act and how authority is evidenced.

Interaction with fines enforcement law. Form 1 (Schedule 2) notifies alleged offenders that non‑payment may lead to enforcement action "under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994" and lists the coercive actions available under that Act (suspension of licences, immobilisation, garnishment, seizure and sale, publication of details). That indicates that unpaid modified penalties become matters for the enforcement Act machinery; the regulations thus route the financial consequences into the civil enforcement regime for penalties and fines.

Commissioner appointment powers relative to CP Act functions. Regulation 6(4) and (5) permit the Commissioner of Police to appoint non‑police persons in writing to be approved officers "for the purposes of the CP Act section 9(1)(f)(iii), 14 or 15 or the purposes of 2 or more of those sections", and to limit such appointments to specified persons or classes (regulation 6(5)). That cross‑links the Commissioner’s administrative appointment power with specified CP Act functions, creating interaction between police administrative governance and the CP Act’s operational sections.

Commencement tied to Criminal Code Amendment (Infringement Notices) Act 2011. Regulation 2 makes the commencement of these regulations contingent on the commencement of the Criminal Code Amendment (Infringement Notices) Act 2011 (other than sections 1 and 2). That shows a statutory sequencing: these regulations are operational only when the underlying enabling amendments to the Criminal Code are in force.

Forms and procedural content as part of CP Act Part 2 mechanism. Regulation 7 binds the forms in Schedule 2 to the CP Act Part 2 process by prescribing Form 1 and Form 2 as the forms for use under CP Act Part 2. That ensures a standard interface between the Criminal Code offences and the CP Act’s enforcement and prosecution consequences.

Limits and reservations. The regulations do not amend the Criminal Code’s substantive punishments or the CP Act itself. They specify which offences may be handled by the CP Act’s infringement regime and the modified penalty amounts. They do not purport to change the enforcement Act’s powers; instead the forms notify alleged offenders of the existing enforcement remedies under that Act.

In short, these regulations operate within a network of statutes and subordinate instruments. They allocate administrative powers and lay down procedural forms that will be used in the CP Act Part 2 infringement‑notice pathway, and they integrate with the fines enforcement regime by notifying alleged offenders of the enforcement options that apply to unpaid modified penalties.

The regulations were first published in March 2015 and have two recorded amendment instruments in 2020 as shown in the compilation table included in the text. The regulations also link their commencement to the Criminal Code Amendment (Infringement Notices) Act 2011.

Original instrument. The Criminal Code (Infringement Notices) Regulations 2015 were published 3 March 2015 and commenced on 4 March 2015 (see regulation 2 and the compilation table). The 2015 instrument established the basic framework of prescribed offences, authorised/approved officer definitions, and the forms.

2020 amendments. Two separate amendment instruments in 2020 affected these regulations:

• Criminal Code (Infringement Notices) Amendment Regulations 2020 (SL 2020/110), published 3 July 2020. The compilation table records that regulation 1 and 2 of SL 2020/110 commenced 3 July 2020, and the remaining regulations commenced 4 July 2020. The text includes an editorial note that regulation 5 (which sets the "when infringement notices cannot be issued" exceptions) was amended by SL 2020/110 r. 4, and Schedule 1 was inserted by SL 2020/110 r. 5. The insertion of Schedule 1 in particular indicates that the list of prescribed Criminal Code offences and their modified penalties as they currently exist were implemented by that 2020 amendment.

• Attorney General Regulations Amendment (Infringement Notices) Regulations 2020 Pt. 3 (SL 2020/162), published 25 September 2020, with commencement recorded as 29 September 2020 (see compilation table notes). The regulations note that Form 1 was amended by SL 2020/162 r. 6. This suggests limited, form‑focused changes (for example, payment details or explanatory text) were made by SL 2020/162.

Compilation note. The regulations include a compilation table listing the original 2015 regulations and the two 2020 amendment instruments, with specific commencement dates for each. The Schedule 1 heading carries an annotation indicating it was inserted by SL 2020/110 r. 5 and that regulation 5 was amended by SL 2020/110 r. 4. Form 1 was explicitly amended by SL 2020/162 r. 6 (see Schedule 2, Form 1 note).

Commencement dependency. The regulations’ own commencement is tied to the Criminal Code Amendment (Infringement Notices) Act 2011 (regulation 2), which means that the regulations were designed to operate only once the enabling amendments to the Criminal Code were in force; the 2015 instrument therefore became operational once the enabling scheme was activated.

No further amendment history in the compilation. Apart from the two 2020 instruments recorded, the compilation table included in the text does not record additional amendment instruments. The notes in the printed forms also mark the SL 2020/162 amendment to Form 1 and SL 2020/110 insertion of Schedule 1.

What the amendment history shows. Practically, the insertion of Schedule 1 and the form amendments in 2020 indicate the current list of prescribed offences and the current content of the forms (including the 28‑day payment instruction and enforcement‑Act warnings in Form 1) are the product of the 2020 regulation amendments. The Commissioner‑appointment provisions and the defined‑term cross‑references were present in the core text and remain operative.

Limitations. The compilation table does not provide any additional legislative history such as explanatory memoranda or parliamentary debates. It records only the formal amendment instruments and commencement dates. Any interpretive history or policy statements beyond the schedule of amendments is not contained in the text provided.

The regulations as provided contain no judicial decisions, case references, or litigation annotations. The instrument itself does not name any cases and the compilation table does not report any judicial review or court challenges. Therefore there is no litigation history recorded in this text to cite.

Potential litigation vectors suggested by the regime. While the regulations contain no reported cases, the structure of the regulations suggests factual or legal issues that could give rise to litigation or judicial review if contested:

• Whether an authorised officer correctly applied regulation 5’s exclusion criteria before issuing a notice. An alleged offender could challenge the issuing officer’s factual basis for concluding an infringement notice was available (for example disputing the alleged offender’s age on the date of the alleged offence, or the assessed value of property in s 378, s 417(1) or s 445 cases). The regulations make the exclusions absolute ("cannot be issued"), which provides a clear legal standard for a challenge if an infringement notice is issued in breach of regulation 5.

• Procedural fairness in the exercise of discretion to issue or withdraw notices. The regulations confer issuance powers on a broad class of police officers and allow the Commissioner to appoint non‑police approved officers (regulation 6(4)-(5)). Disputes could arise over whether a person appointed under regulation 6(4) was validly appointed in writing and within the limitations of regulation 6(5), or whether an authorised officer produced appropriate evidence of Certificate of Authority (regulation 6(2)). Challenges could focus on the procedural validity of appointments or the proper use of delegated authority.

• The content and sufficiency of Form 1’s warnings. An aggrieved person could contest whether the form adequately informed them of their rights, or whether a deficiently completed form caused prejudice (for example, if payment fields, addresses, or election instructions were incorrectly filled in). The regulations prescribe the form, but if an issued form did not conform to Schedule 2 text, an affected person could seek relief.

• Enforcement pathways and rights following non‑payment. Because Form 1 lists enforcement actions available under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994, disputes could arise about the proper application of those enforcement measures and whether they were lawfully invoked in a particular case. Such disputes would typically engage the enforcement Act and not these regulations directly, but the pathway begins with the infringement notice.

Absence of recorded decisions. None of the above is to say that litigation has occurred; the instrument simply contains no reported litigation history. The points above describe plausible legal issues that could be litigated given the regulatory design, but they are speculative about litigation types rather than statements that litigation has in fact taken place.

Practical note for practitioners. In the absence of reported decisions, advice to clients should depend on the text of the regulations and on the cross‑referenced statutes (the CP Act and the enforcement Act) and any contemporaneous administrative practices. If a client faces enforcement or has received a possibly invalid infringement notice, the starting points are the face of the notice (Schedule 2, Form 1), the exclusion criteria in regulation 5, and any record of the issuer’s authority (regulation 6(2)). Any challenge would proceed from those facts and the wording of the CP Act and enforcement Act.

This instrument is short but contains several practical traps and operational subtleties that practitioners and administrators should note. The following points are grounded directly in the regulations and the prescribed forms.

1. Uniform modified penalty may not match the value of the property. Schedule 1 fixes a $500 modified penalty for theft (s 378), possession of suspected stolen property (s 417(1)), and destruction/damage (s 445). Regulation 5 excludes the infringement‑notice option where the alleged value exceeds $500 for those offences (regulation 5(b)-(d)). Consequently, the $500 modified penalty equals the exclusion thresholds for those property offences. That means:

   • If the alleged value is $500 or less, an officer may offer the $500 infringement notice.
   • If the alleged value is over $500, no infringement notice may be issued. Administratively, officers must assess value quickly at the scene; mistakes in value assessment can lead to improper use of an infringement notice.

2. Age exclusion is absolute and time‑point specific. Regulation 5(a) states that an infringement notice cannot be issued if, on the day the alleged offence is believed to have been committed, the alleged offender is under 17. The critical date for the age test is the date of the alleged offence, not the date of issuance. Officers must therefore check and record the alleged offender’s date of birth and the alleged offence date before issuing notices.

3. 28‑day payment period and election to be prosecuted. Form 1 gives the alleged offender 28 days from the date of issue to pay the modified penalty. It also gives the defendant a procedural right to elect prosecution in court by signing and returning the notice within 28 days. Practical issues include:

   • The alleged offender must sign and post the notice to the address on the form within 28 days to elect court proceedings; merely telling an officer in person may not suffice.
   • Late election or late payment carries risk: the form warns that failure to pay may result in prosecution or enforcement action.
   • The forms require that payment methods and addresses be provided; errors or omissions in those fields may complicate compliance or create disputes about timeliness.

4. Payment is "not an admission" but it has enforcement consequences. Form 1 states that paying the modified penalty "will not be regarded as an admission for the purposes of any civil or criminal court case". That protects the payer from an admission being used in subsequent proceedings. However, payment still has the practical effect of resolving the matter administratively; if an alleged offender later wishes to pursue some defence or seek to vindicate rights in court, paying may foreclose the opportunity to contest the allegation in court (unless the person elects prosecution initially). Parties should be clear on that practical trade‑off.

5. Withdrawal and refunds: limited procedural detail. Form 2 records withdrawal and promises a refund if the modified penalty has been paid. The regulations do not specify timeframes, banking or administrative processes for refunding. Practitioners should expect operational delay and should ask issuing agencies for written confirmation of refund procedures.

6. Certificate of Authority evidencing power. Regulation 6(2) allows authorised police officers to show their Certificate of Authority to demonstrate they are authorised to issue infringement notices. If an officer issues a notice but cannot produce a Certificate of Authority, an affected person may credibly challenge the validity of the notice on procedural grounds.

7. Commissioner appointments may broaden issuer pool. Regulation 6(4) permits the Commissioner to appoint non‑police persons as approved officers in writing for specified CP Act functions (regulation 6(5)). If an alleged offender is issued a notice by a non‑police approved officer, questions could arise about the scope of the written appointment and compliance with regulation 6(5) limitations. Practitioners should seek to inspect written appointment instruments if the validity of issuance by a non‑police person is contested.

8. Reliance on external definitions. Several key terms are defined in other instruments rather than in these regulations (for example Certificate of Authority, senior police officer). When a dispute hinges on meaning or eligibility, counsel should consult the Police Force Regulations 1979 and the Criminal Investigation Act 2006 as those instruments supply definitions used by these regulations.

9. The form’s enforcement list is not a closed list. Form 1 lists various enforcement options under the fines enforcement Act, but it does so by example; the form does not purport to exhaust the enforcement remedies available under that Act. Practitioners should therefore consult the enforcement Act directly for the full range of remedies and any statutory limits on their exercise.

10. Commencement linkage can cause timing confusion. The regulations come into operation when the Criminal Code Amendment (Infringement Notices) Act 2011 (other than ss 1 and 2) comes into operation (regulation 2). In any transition period or when reading historical records, administrators should verify whether the enabling Act was in force at the time a notice was issued.

11. Minor drafting choices in Form 1. The form includes the phrase "If you do not want to be prosecuted in court for the alleged offence, pay the modified penalty...". That wording creates a practical decisional moment for a recipient. If the recipient is unsure about the alleged facts, the only way to retain a right to a court hearing is to sign and return the notice electing prosecution within 28 days; failure to do so may result in loss of that option once the period expires. This is a procedural pitfall often overlooked by recipients.

12. No explicit guidance on evidential standards. The regulations do not state what evidence is required to justify issuance, only that an authorised/approved officer may issue a prescribed form. That absence creates uncertainty about the standard an officer must satisfy before giving a notice and may generate disputes about whether the officer had reasonable grounds for believing the offence was committed.

Practitioners should therefore treat issuance and receipt of these notices as operating at the intersection of short statutory deadlines, evidentiary assessments, and administrative formality. Small procedural errors (wrong dates, incorrect value assessments, failure to confirm age) can affect whether the notice is lawfully issued or whether it is subject to withdrawal and refund.

Compliance duties split between issuing authorities (police and appointed approved officers), agency administrators responsible for forms and refunds, and alleged offenders. The following practical checklist strictly follows the text of the regulations and the prescribed forms.

For issuing officers and police stations

1. Confirm authority to issue. Ensure the person issuing the notice is an authorised officer (a police officer who is not a senior police officer per regulation 6(1)) or an approved officer (a senior police officer per regulation 6(3) or a person appointed in writing by the Commissioner per regulation 6(4)). If you are an authorised police officer, be prepared to show your Certificate of Authority (regulation 6(2); defined by Police Force Regulations 1979 reg 901A). Keep appointment documents for any Commissioner‑appointed non‑police approved officers on file and ensure they are in writing as required by regulation 6(4).

2. Check exclusion criteria before issuing. Before preparing Form 1, verify that none of the regulation 5 exclusion circumstances apply:

   • Confirm the alleged offender’s date of birth and ensure they were 17 or older on the date the alleged offence is believed to have been committed (regulation 5(a)).
   • For s 378 (stealing), s 417(1) (possession of suspected stolen property), and s 445 (destroying or damaging property), establish whether the value of the thing or property exceeds $500; if it does, do not issue an infringement notice (regulation 5(b)-(d)).

3. Use the prescribed Form 1. Issue the infringement notice on the exact Form 1 content in Schedule 2 (regulation 7(a)). Complete all required fields: alleged offender particulars, description of offence and Criminal Code section, date/time/place, modified penalty amount ($500 per Schedule 1), officer name, registered number, police station, and date of issue. Ensure payment methods, mailing address, and online/telephone payment details are correctly included, reflecting any local administrative payment arrangements (Schedule 2, Form 1).

4. Advise correctly on 28‑day period and election option. Make it clear to the recipient that payment must be made to an approved officer within 28 days to avoid prosecution, and that the defendant can elect prosecution by signing and returning the notice within the same 28‑day period (Schedule 2, Form 1).

5. Maintain records and evidence. Retain copies of the issued Form 1 and any supporting material used to determine the value of property or the age of the alleged offender. Document the basis for value assessments and any enquiries about the recipient’s age, in case the validity of issuance is later disputed.

6. Withdrawal and refunds. If circumstances require withdrawing an issued notice, use Form 2 (regulation 7(b) and Schedule 2, Form 2). If the modified penalty was already paid, initiate the refund procedures and document the refund transaction, since Form 2 promises a refund on payment (Schedule 2, Form 2). The regulations do not set timeframes for refunds; prepare to coordinate with agency finance units.

For the Commissioner of Police and administrative leads

1. Written appointments. If appointing non‑police approved officers, make the appointment in writing and specify the CP Act functions for which the appointment is made (regulation 6(5) permits appointments to be made for purposes of CP Act section 9(1)(f)(iii), 14 or 15, or two or more of those sections). Clearly record the class of persons or specified individuals covered by the appointment.

2. Training and guidance. Provide operational guidance and training to authorised and approved officers on the regulation 5 exclusions, on valuation approaches for property in theft/damage cases, on the evidence required to establish age at the time of the alleged offence, and on use of Form 1 and Form 2. Ensure administrative staff maintain templates and up‑to‑date payment instructions referenced in Form 1.

3. Payment and refund processes. Implement and publicise standard payment methods for the modified penalty, including in‑person, postal, online, and telephone details as required by Form 1 (Schedule 2, Form 1). Establish an internal refund workflow that triggers on issuance of Form 2 where payment has already been made (Schedule 2, Form 2).

4. Record access and appointment documents. Ensure copies of Commissioner appointments of non‑police approved officers are accessible for scrutiny, and maintain Certificate of Authority issuance records for authorised officers, so staff can produce evidence of authority when needed.

For alleged offenders (practical steps)

1. Immediate decision point on receipt. If you receive Form 1, you have two mutually exclusive options within 28 days: pay the $500 modified penalty to avoid prosecution, or sign and return the notice within 28 days to elect to be prosecuted in court (Schedule 2, Form 1). Decide quickly because the 28‑day window is strict.

2. Payment is not an admission. The form expressly states that payment "will not be regarded as an admission" in civil or criminal proceedings (Schedule 2, Form 1). Understand that payment settles the matter administratively but is not a judicial determination of guilt.

3. If you think the notice is invalid. If you believe the notice was issued out of time, to someone under 17 at the time of alleged offending, or in breach of regulation 5 value limits, consider signing and returning the form to elect prosecution within 28 days to preserve your right to contest the matter in court. Alternatively, seek early legal advice on whether the notice can be challenged on procedural grounds or withdrawn.

4. If you pay and later the notice is withdrawn. If you have paid and the issuing agency subsequently withdraws the notice using Form 2, you are entitled to a refund under Form 2 (Schedule 2, Form 2). Keep receipts of payment and correspondence, and make a written request for refund if the agency does not proactively process it.

5. Keep records and proof of timely action. Whether paying or electing prosecution, retain evidence that payment was made within 28 days (transaction receipts) or that the signed election was posted within 28 days (certificate of posting or registered post receipt), because the forms contemplate time limits and late action can result in enforcement or prosecution.

6. Enforcement consequences of non‑payment. If you neither pay nor elect prosecution within 28 days, the issuing agency may choose to prosecute or the modified penalty may be forwarded to fines enforcement agencies, which may use coercive measures listed on Form 1 under the enforcement Act (Schedule 2, Form 1). Be prepared for collateral administrative consequences such as licence suspensions and garnishee actions.

Recordkeeping and auditability

• Keep copies of all issued and withdrawn forms and of Certificate of Authority and Commissioner appointment documents.
• Log the factual basis for value assessments and age determinations.
• Track payments, refunds, and any enforcement referrals to the fines enforcement agency.

In short, compliance requires procedural care: verifying exclusion criteria before issuance, using the prescribed forms exactly, ensuring authorised status of issuers, giving recipients clear information about the 28‑day options and payment channels, and maintaining administrative systems for refunds and enforcement referrals. These steps are required to align practice with the regulations as written.