Currency Determination No. 11 of 1993

The central concept is the “specification” - a set of mandatory physical characteristics that a coin must meet to be a coin of that denomination under the Currency Act. The determination sets the standard composition: for silver coins, not less than 99.9% silver; for gold coins, not less than 99.99% gold. This fineness is expressed as a minimum, meaning the Mint may use metal of higher purity, but not lower. The standard weight is the target mass, and a variation from that weight is explicitly allowed: for example, 0.500 grams either way for the $1 silver coin, and 1.5 grams either way for the $30 silver coin. This tolerance accounts for manufacturing variance and is a critical concept for investors and dealers, because a coin at the low end of tolerance contains less precious metal than one at the high end, yet both are legal tender of the same face value. The shape is invariably circular. The edge is either fully milled (a series of ridges) or has alternating milled and plain segments of specific lengths. The edge design helps prevent counterfeiting and distinguishes denominations: $2, $10 and $30 coins have the alternating-edge pattern, while $1, $25 and $100 coins have fully milled edges. The diameter and thickness are fixed to the nearest tenth of a millimetre, ensuring the coins are physically uniform for stacking and vending. The obverse design is uniform across all coins: an effigy of Queen Elizabeth II (the specific effigy is not described but is presumably the standard one for that era) and the inscriptions “ELIZABETH II”, “AUSTRALIA” and the denomination in words. This makes each coin immediately identifiable as Australian legal tender. The reverse design differs by coin: the Kookaburra motif (two birds on a branch) appears on most silver coins, with additional motifs such as the Sydney Opera House (for the 20th anniversary), an eagle, a chrysanthemum with Japanese and English text for the royal wedding, and on gold coins the Whiptail Wallaby with a sunburst and Chinese characters meaning “fortune”. The inclusion of foreign language inscriptions shows these coins were designed for international bullion markets, particularly Asia. The determination also introduces the concept of a coin series: the silver coins are called “The Australian Kookaburra” and the gold coins “The Australian Nugget”. These series names, together with the fineness mark (e.g. “1 OZ. 999 SILVER”), are part of the mandatory design. A further concept is that the determination is not self-contained: it operates under the broader Currency Act 1965, which already establishes the denominations, the Mint’s authority, and the legal tender status. The determination merely fills in the design details for these specific coins. It also expressly states it does not affect any other determination, meaning the Treasurer can issue multiple designs for the same denomination over time. Finally, the concept of “commencement” is important: the instrument takes effect on the specified date (27 October 1993), after which the Mint may lawfully produce these coins. Coins produced before that date would not be compliant with this determination and would presumably not be legal tender under this instrument.

The determination directly affects the Royal Australian Mint, which is the sole entity authorised to strike these coins. The Mint must comply with every physical specification - weight, diameter, thickness, edge, fineness, and design - or else the coins would not meet the legal definition. This imposes precise manufacturing constraints: the Mint must source metal of the required fineness, control weight within tolerances, produce dies with exact inscriptions and images, and manage edge milling. The cost of compliance is absorbed by the Mint and ultimately by buyers through the issue price. Dealers and bullion traders who buy these coins from the Mint for resale are indirectly affected: they rely on the determination to guarantee that the coins they sell are genuine, legal tender, and meet a uniform standard. Any deviation from the specification would undermine the coin’s authenticity and marketability. Collectors and investors are the ultimate end-users. They acquire these coins for their precious metal content, numismatic value, and sovereign guarantee. The determination gives them confidence that a coin marked “1 OZ. 999 SILVER” actually contains at least one troy ounce of silver (the $1 coin is 31.635 grams, approximately one troy ounce; the $2 coin is 62.77 grams, approximately two ounces; the $10 coin is 312.347 grams, approximately ten ounces; the $30 coin is 1,002.502 grams, approximately one kilogram). The weight variation, however, means a buyer might receive a coin at the lower end of the tolerance, containing slightly less metal, without any compensation. The determination also affects the Commonwealth itself: the Treasurer, acting under delegation, makes the determination, and the Mint issues the coins. The Commonwealth earns seigniorage - the difference between the face value and the cost of production - but because the precious metal value far exceeds the face value, seigniorage is effectively negative in the traditional sense; instead, the Mint sells these coins at a premium above melt value reflecting manufacturing, distribution and mark-up. The determination thus creates a government product competing globally with private bullion issuers such as the Perth Mint (which issues similar coins under the Australian government guarantee) and foreign mints. The determination does not affect the general public in everyday transactions, because these coins are unlikely to circulate. However, if a person attempted to use a $100 gold coin to pay a $100 debt, the recipient would be obliged to accept it as legal tender only up to the limits set by the Currency Act (which for coins above $1 may have no limit - the Act itself must be consulted). Also affected are the suppliers of dies, planchets and packaging; they must conform to the Mint’s specifications. Finally, the determination affects the enforcement agencies: the Australian Federal Police and the Mint’s own security may use the specifications to detect counterfeits, and counterfeit coins that do not match the weight, dimensions or design can be prosecuted under the Currency Act’s counterfeiting provisions.

The determination itself does not create duties for private persons; it is a specification instrument addressed internally to the Mint and the Treasurer. The key duty falls on the Royal Australian Mint to produce coins that conform exactly to the stated specifications. This includes ensuring the metal composition is at least the minimum fineness (99.9% or 99.99%), the weight is within the allowed tolerance, the dimensions are correct, and the design features - including the exact inscriptions and their layout - are reproduced as prescribed. If the Mint produces a coin that, for example, has a weight of 31.000 grams instead of the standard 31.635 grams with a 0.500 gram tolerance, that coin would be just barely within tolerance (31.635 - 0.500 = 31.135 grams; 31.000 is below). That would be non-compliant and would not be a lawful coin of that denomination. The Mint thereby has a quality-control duty. The Treasurer, or the Parliamentary Secretary acting for the Treasurer, has the duty to make determinations under s13A(1) of the Currency Act and to ensure they are published. The rights of the Commonwealth include the right to issue these coins as legal tender, to sell them at whatever price the market will bear, and to withdraw them if necessary. Holders of these coins have the right to use them as legal tender for payment of debts. Under the Currency Act, coins of a denomination above $1 are generally legal tender for any amount, but the effect of precious metal coins is that they are rarely used as payment because their bullion value exceeds face value. A holder also has the right to sell the coin to a bullion dealer or collector at market value. The determination also gives holders the right to expect authenticity: a coin bearing the exact reverse and obverse described is presumptively a genuine Commonwealth coin. If a coin is minted with a different weight or design, it might be counterfeit or a trial piece, and the holder may have rights against the Mint or seller under contract or consumer law. The determination does not confer any right to demand that the Mint produce more coins or cease production. It also does not impose any duty on merchants to accept these coins in payment; the general law of legal tender applies, but in practice a merchant can refuse payment in high-value coins if they are inconvenient. The determination also does not affect the existing rights of the Mint to produce other coins under other determinations. In summary, the rights are largely about the coin’s status as genuine legal tender of a specified metal content, and the duties are about manufacturing accuracy and authorised issue.

This determination contains no penalty provisions. It is a specification instrument, not an offence-creating instrument. Enforcement of the specifications occurs through the broader Currency Act 1965. The Currency Act makes it an offence to counterfeit Australian coins, to interfere with coin specifications, or to utter counterfeit coins. If a person were to produce a coin that looks like the Kookaburra or Nugget coin but does not meet the specifications (e.g., lower silver content, wrong weight), that would likely be a counterfeit under s16 of the Currency Act, punishable by imprisonment. The determination provides the baseline against which authenticity is judged. The Mint itself could theoretically be in breach of the Act if it issued coins that do not comply with the determination, but the Act likely provides a defence if the deviation is inadvertent or within tolerance. There is no private right of action under the determination; a buyer who receives a non-compliant coin would rely on contract law, consumer guarantees (under the Australian Consumer Law) or possibly an action for breach of statutory duty, though that is rare. The enforcement of the determination against the Mint is ultimately a matter of administrative law: the Treasurer could direct compliance, and perhaps the Commonwealth Ombudsman or the Auditor-General could investigate. For counterfeiting, enforcement is by the Australian Federal Police and state police, with prosecution by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. The determination also plays a role in evidence: a coin that matches the specifications is prima facie genuine; one that does not may be evidence of counterfeiting. Because the coins are bullion, counterfeits will often be made with lower precious metal content, and the weight tolerance is tight enough that a serious deviation is detectable. The edge milling, especially the alternating segments on $2, $10 and $30 coins, is designed to make counterfeiting more difficult. The small eagle motif and chrysanthemum motif are additional security features. There are no administrative penalties for non-compliance by the public, because the public has no duties under this instrument. The only penalty exposure is for those who fraudulently produce or deal with non-compliant coins as if they were genuine. In summary, the enforcement framework resides in the parent Act, not in the determination, and the determination’s role is evidentiary and definitional.

This determination operates under the Currency Act 1965, specifically section 13A(1). It is a subordinate legislative instrument. The Currency Act itself establishes the denominations of Australian coins, the legal tender limits, the monopoly of the Commonwealth in coinage, and the offences for counterfeiting. The determination fills in the design and specification details, but it does not override or modify any part of the Currency Act. If the Currency Act were amended to, for example, prohibit certain denominations or require different fineness, this determination would likely be impliedly repealed or require amendment. The determination does not interact directly with the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, but if the Mint or a dealer misrepresents a coin as having a certain weight or purity, the Australian Consumer Law may apply. The determination provides a benchmark: saying a coin is “1 oz 999 silver” when it is actually underweight would be misleading conduct. The determination also interacts with taxation law. The sale of these coins may attract goods and services tax (GST), though precious metal bullion is generally GST-free if it meets certain purity thresholds. These coins (99.9% silver and 99.99% gold) likely qualify as investment gold and silver, making them GST-free. The determination’s statement of fineness is crucial for tax treatment. Capital gains tax may apply on disposal if the coin is held as an investment. The determination also interacts with Australian standards for weighing and measuring, as the Mint must calibrate its equipment to ensure the weight tolerances are met. Internationally, these coins are traded on global bullion markets, and the determination’s specs align with standard troy-ounce and kilo sizes, allowing them to be recognised by refiners and exchanges. The determination does not interact with state laws, as currency is a Commonwealth power. It may interact with the Reserve Bank Act 1959 to the extent that the Reserve Bank is involved in currency distribution, but these bullion coins are not typically distributed through banking channels. Finally, the determination interacts with other coin determinations: it expressly states it does not affect them, so multiple determinations for $1 coins can coexist. This creates a complex web of legal specifications for different issues, and a collector must identify which determination applies to a particular coin to know its exact specs. The determination does not interact with the Criminal Code - the offences are in the Currency Act. In all, the interaction is narrow: the determination sits within a statutory framework and provides factual inputs for other laws (tax, consumer, trade, and criminal).

Currency Determination No. 11 of 1993 has no amendment history. It was made on 18 October 1993, signed by Gary Johns as Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer, and commenced on 27 October 1993. The text provided is the original and only version. There is no record in the source of any subsequent amending determinations or legislative instruments that revised the specifications. Given the nature of commemorative coin determinations, they are usually stand-alone and not amended; if the Mint wishes to issue a later coin with different specs, it issues a new determination (e.g., Currency Determination No. 12 of 1993 or a determination for a later year). The instrument is spent in the sense that it authorised a particular series of coins, but it remains legally operative for those coins already issued. The coins themselves, once produced and sold, are governed by the determination as at the date of issue. If the determination were repealed, existing coins would likely retain their legal tender status because they were lawfully issued under a valid determination at the time. The lack of amendment means there is no question of transitional provisions or retrospectivity. This is typical for coin specifications: each determination is a one-off production authority. For research and compliance purposes, the original instrument is the sole source. Any subsequent change to the design of the Kookaburra or Nugget series (such as annual changes to the reverse) would appear in later determinations, not as amendments to this instrument. Therefore, anyone seeking the specifications for a 1993-dated silver Kookaburra $1 coin must refer to this determination. For later years, other determinations apply.

There is no reported litigation concerning Currency Determination No. 11 of 1993. The source text does not mention any court cases, and a search of Australian legal databases would likely yield none because this instrument is purely administrative and technical. Disputes involving these coins would more likely arise under contract or consumer law than under the determination itself. For example, a buyer who alleges a coin is underweight or of wrong purity could sue the seller for breach of contract or misleading conduct, and the determination would be evidence of the required specifications. But the determination itself has not been the subject of judicial interpretation. The only potential for litigation would be if someone challenged the validity of the determination, e.g., on the ground that the Parliamentary Secretary did not have proper delegation from the Treasurer, or that the determination was not tabled in Parliament (if required). Given that it is a Determination under a statutory power, it is a legislative instrument likely subject to the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (now the Legislation Act 2003). If the instrument was not registered or tabled, its validity might be impugned. However, there is no indication of such a challenge. The absence of litigation suggests that the specifications have been uncontroversial and that the Mint has complied with them. It also suggests that the coin series was commercially successful without generating legal disputes. The litigation history is therefore a blank slate. This is notable for a deep dive: it means there are no judicial glosses on the meaning of terms like “effigy” or “representation”, or on the interpretation of weight tolerances. Any legal uncertainty therefore remains unresolved. For example, if a coin is within the weight tolerance but the design is slightly off-centre or the beads are not precisely raised, does it still comply? The determination does not specify positional tolerances, so the Mint’s own quality standards fill the gap. No court has clarified whether such deviations would render the coin non-compliant and thus not legal tender. The absence of litigation also means no precedent on whether a holder can sue the Mint for non-conforming coins. In sum, the litigation history is nil, which itself is a fact condition that practitioners should note: the legal risks are untested.

Several aspects of this determination could trip up unwary users. First, the weight tolerance: the $1 silver coin has a standard weight of 31.635 grams with a variation of 0.500 grams allowed. That means a compliant coin can weigh anywhere from 31.135 grams to 32.135 grams. A coin at the low end contains about 1.5% less silver than one at the high end, yet both are legal tender for $1. The bullion market typically trades based on actual weight, so a buyer who acquires a coin at the lower tolerance loses value compared to one at the higher tolerance. The determination does not require the Mint to state the actual weight on the coin or certificate. Second, the fineness is expressed as “not less than” - the silver must be at least 99.9% but can be higher (e.g., 99.99%). The coin’s inscription says “999 SILVER”, implying exactly 99.9%, but the Mint could use purer metal. This is a subtle mismatch between the inscription and the legal requirement. Third, the determination does not specify the design’s position or orientation. It says “a representation of 2 kookaburras perched on a tree branch”, but does not give any orientation, degree of relief, or minimum size. The Mint’s artistic interpretation could vary between issues, and as long as it is a “representation” it likely complies. This gives the Mint discretion that could affect collector value. Fourth, the determination provides for two different $1 silver coins and two different $2 silver coins, each with virtually identical specifications except the reverse. The first $1 coin (clause 4) has an eagle motif; the second $1 coin (clause 5) has the Sydney Opera House. The difference is slight, but a person who receives a coin expecting one design might be surprised. The determination does not distinguish them by any other identifier (e.g., series year or mint mark), except the inscription “1993” appears on both. This could cause confusion. Fifth, the $30 coin (clause 10) has a reverse that includes a chrysanthemum motif, inscriptions “ROYAL WEDDING”, and Japanese characters. The wording “ROYAL WEDDING” and ‘hou shuku’ are in addition to the Kookaburra and weight marking. The determination does not specify which royal wedding is commemorated, leaving ambiguity. Sixth, the $100 gold coin has a Chinese character meaning “fortune”, but no indication of which character or script. In 1993, traditional or simplified characters could be used; the determination does not specify, potentially leading to inconsistency. Seventh, the determination does not address edge lettering or reeded edges - it only says milled or alternating segments. Some foreign mints use edge lettering for security; here there is none. Eighth, the coins are legal tender but the determination does not state the limits of legal tender for these coins. Under s16 of the Currency Act, coins of denominations above $1 are legal tender for any amount, but that is not in this instrument. Practitioners might mistakenly think these coins are only legal tender up to the usual limits. Ninth, the determination does not contain a sunset or expiry clause. It remains in force indefinitely, even if the Mint no longer produces these coins. Theoretically, a person could produce a matching coin after the Mint has stopped, but because the determination exists, such a coin would still be official if minted by the Mint. However, the Mint cannot produce them without a separate issue decision. A counterfeiter could argue they are mimicking an official design, but the date 1993 is part of the design, so a later reproduction with the same design would be an anachronism. Tenth, the instrument was signed by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer, acting for the Treasurer. If the delegation under s13A(1) was not properly in place at the time, the determination could be invalid, but no one has challenged it. In summary, the gotchas revolve around measurement tolerances, design ambiguity, and the gap between the legal standard and market expectations.

Compliance with Currency Determination No. 11 of 1993 is relevant only to the Royal Australian Mint and, by extension, to any person or entity that contracts with the Mint to produce these coins. The steps are straightforward. First, the Mint must ensure that the metal used for the silver coins (clauses 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10) has a fineness of not less than 99.9% silver, and for the gold coins (clauses 9, 11) not less than 99.99% gold. This means sourcing refined bullion from accredited refiners and assaying each batch. Second, the blanks (planchets) must be struck to the exact weight within the permitted variation. This requires precision weighing and a quality control process that discards blanks outside the tolerance. For the $1 silver coins, the target is 31.635 grams ±0.500 grams. For the $2 coins, 62.770 grams ±0.500 grams. For the $10 coin, 312.347 grams ±1.0 gram. For the $30 coin, 1,002.502 grams ±1.5 grams. For the gold $25 coin, 7.807 grams ±0.030 grams. For the gold $100 coin, 31.162 grams ±0.055 grams. The Mint must calibrate scales regularly and keep records of each coin’s weight for audit. Third, the diameter and thickness must be controlled within the specified dimensions. The $1 coin must be 40.60 mm diameter and 4.00 mm thick; the $2 coin 50.3 mm and 4.5 mm; the $10 coin 75.5 mm and 8.7 mm; the $30 coin 100 mm and 14.6 mm; the $25 coin 20.10 mm and 2.00 mm; the $100 coin 32.10 mm and 2.80 mm. The Mint must produce dies that match these dimensions and use pressing machinery that achieves the correct thickness. Fourth, the edge treatment must be as specified: fully milled for $1, $25, and $100 coins; alternating milled and plain segments of exact lengths for $2 (approx. 10.25 mm milled, 29 mm plain), $10 (approx. 15.40 mm milled, 43 mm plain), and $30 (approx. 20.50 mm milled, 58 mm plain). This requires custom edge-rolling dies and periodic inspection of the pattern. Fifth, the obverse and reverse designs must be reproduced exactly. The obverse must have the Queen’s effigy and inscriptions “ELIZABETH II”, “AUSTRALIA”, and the denomination in words, all encircled by raised beads inside the rim. The reverse must have the specified motifs, inscriptions (including weights, series names, dates, and foreign characters), and the bead ring. The Mint must create master dies from approved artwork and verify that all inscriptions are present, correctly spelled, and placed as described. For the $30 coin, the reverse includes both an English motif and a Japanese motif; clarity is essential. For the gold coins, the Chinese character for fortune must be the correct character. Sixth, after striking, each coin should be inspected for defects. Coins that are off-weight, off-dimension, or have flawed designs must be culled and remelted. The Mint should also conduct random chemical assays to confirm fineness. Seventh, the Mint must retain records of production batches, including the metal source, assay results, and weight distribution, to demonstrate compliance. Eighth, the coins should be packaged or certified as meeting the determination, though the determination itself does not require packaging. Ninth, the Mint must ensure that no other determination of the same denomination is inadvertently used for these coins; the determination’s clause 3 states it does not affect other determinations, but the Mint must apply the correct determination for each issue. For example, if the Mint had a previous determination for a $1 silver coin with different specs, the 1993 coins must follow this determination. Finally, for dealers and sellers of these coins, compliance means accurately representing the coin’s specifications. While they have no duty under this determination, misrepresenting weight or fineness could breach consumer law. They should rely on the Mint’s certificate or assay, and if in doubt, have the coin independently verified. For buyers, compliance is passive: they need only ensure the coin bears the identifying features (kookaburra, nugget, inscriptions) and, if they wish to be certain of metal content, have it weighed and tested. In practice, the Mint has a strong incentive to comply because non-compliant coins would damage its reputation and could be rejected by bullion markets.