Currency (Perth Mint) Determination 2004 (No. 4)

The Determination relies on three main statutory-technical concepts embedded in its text.

1. Specification by item in a Schedule: Section 3 expressly ties the contents of Schedule 1 to the statutory power in subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965. It prescribes five discrete attributes that each Schedule item must specify: denomination, standard composition, standard weight and allowable variation, dimensions, and design. The Schedule is therefore not descriptive ornamentation; it is the operative list of technical standards the instrument sets “for subsection 13A(1)” (s 3).

2. Composition and measurement tolerances: The Schedule records both nominal “standard composition” (minimum purities) and “standard weight and allowable variation” for each coin. Examples: gold items are specified as “at least 99.99% gold” with gram weights and tight variations (Item 1: 15.594 g ± 0.040 g). Silver items are specified “at least 99.9% silver” with higher nominal mass and larger weight tolerance (Items 31-40: 31.635 g ± 0.500 g). Platinum items are “at least 99.95% platinum” with their respective weights and tolerances (e.g. Item 41: 15.605 g ± 0.045 g). Dimensions follow in every item: maximum diameter, maximum thickness, shape and edge style (“Continuously milled”).

3. Design as a legal parameter: The Schedule provides precise wording for the obverse and reverse design features. The obverse is uniform across items: a circle of raised beads inside the rim containing specified inscriptions and an effigy of Queen Elizabeth II and a monogram ‘IRB’. Reverse designs vary and are recorded with inscriptions, motif descriptions (for example, representations of kookaburras, kangaroos, native flowers, city scenes, or marine life), the year and designer initials, and a mint mark ‘P’. Several reverse entries explicitly include wording such as ‘1/2 OZ 9999 GOLD’ or ‘1 OZ 999 SILVER’ and national descriptors like ‘DISCOVER AUSTRALIA’.

As a technical instrument, the Determination links the legal power to specify coinage with precise manufacturing data and intellectual property of appearance. The instrument establishes that physical parameters and visual inscriptions are matters of statutory record, not mere administrative guidance. Section 4 preserves the existence of other determinations by declaring the Schedule does not affect other determinations, so this instrument is intended as an additive catalogue rather than a consolidating repeal.

The text itself identifies or implies several classes of interested parties; the legislative language and the Schedule supply the bases for that mapping.

• The authorising official and the legal authority: The Determination is made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer (Chris Pearce, as signed), acting under subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965. Therefore the instrument primarily affects the legal scope exercised by that delegate and the administrative units advising or executing coin issuance.

• Mint/manufacturer: The title identifies these as Perth Mint coins. The Schedule’s technical content imposes manufacturing parameters: composition, mass and allowable variation, maximum diameter and thickness, edge treatment and detailed design features. Any organisation producing coins pursuant to this Determination must meet those specifications. While the Determination does not set operational procurement or production rules, its technical requirements create obligations for manufacturing processes and quality control.

• Distributors and sellers of the specified coins: distributors will need to ensure that items they market and supply match the legally recorded specifications. Where the Schedule requires precise inscriptions and mint marks, packaging claims and provenance statements by distributors must align with the statutory descriptions.

• Holders, purchasers and potential testers of coins: collectors, dealers and purchasers use the Schedule as a reference for authentication. The Schedule provides objective verification points: metal purity statements, weight and allowable variation, maximum diameter and thickness, and the exact text and iconography of obverse and reverse designs (including year and designer initials where applicable). These are the legal technical standards against which physical specimens can be checked.

• Regulators and advisers: agencies or professionals advising on currency, taxation, customs classification or anti-money laundering matters will rely on the Determination as an authoritative source of the physical attributes of those coin issues. Although the Determination contains no enforcement clauses, other regulatory instruments or statutes may reference or depend on the specifications in legal practice.

• The public purse and taxpayers: while the Determination itself does not specify financing or subsidies, any government costs associated with commissioning designs, minting, or acquiring coin stock (if applicable in practice) will be shaped by these specifications; for example, items requiring high-purity metals, colour-washing and multiple designer initials may carry production cost implications.

Notably, the Determination does not itself name private purchasers or commercial counterparties beyond what is implicit in the catalogue of coin types. It does not, in its text, impose financial obligations, fees or penalties on any party. The immediate, concrete effect is to bind the specified physical and visual parameters (as recorded in Schedule 1) to the statutory power under subsection 13A(1) (s 3). The instrument therefore most directly affects the minting and authentication ecosystem: the maker (Perth Mint by implication of title), its contractors, distributors and purchasers of the reported coins.

The Determination is a specification instrument rather than a statute creating novel duties or rights in terms of civil liabilities or criminal offences. Its operative provisions create descriptive legal parameters that produce regulatory duties by implication. The following duties and rights can be read from the text.

Duties (express or implied by specification)

• Duty to produce coins according to the specified attributes: Section 3 establishes that each Schedule item “specifies” the attributes required “for subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965”. For any body producing coins under that statutory provision, there is an implied duty to match denomination, composition, weight (including allowable variation), and dimensions, and to apply the recorded obverse and reverse designs. The Schedule records these as mandatory specifications for the purposes of the cited subsection (s 3).

• Duty to respect other determinations: Section 4 states that the specifications in Schedule 1 “do not affect any other determination of the specifications of a coin”. The implication is that producers and officials must operate with awareness of other determinations in force and not assume this instrument supersedes them (s 4).

• Duty to observe commencement procedures: Section 2 sets the commencement event , notification in the Gazette. Administratorially, officials must ensure the instrument is gazetted to bring it into force.

Rights (express or implied)

• Reliance for authentication and legal description: Entities that rely on official specifications for authentication, valuation, regulatory compliance or catalogue descriptions have a statutory-referable right to use these recorded specifications as authoritative technical descriptors. The Schedule provides the definitive legislative descriptions for the items listed (s 3; Schedule 1).

• Right to specify design elements by authority: The instrument reflects the exercise of power to set aesthetic and textual elements on coinage, as recorded by the Parliamentary Secretary. That authority establishes the right of the relevant delegate to determine and publish such specifications under subsection 13A(1).

What is not in the Determination

• No express penalties, prosecution powers, or administrative sanctioning provisions are embedded in this Determination. The instrument does not itself create enforcement mechanisms or procedural requirements for disputes, recalls, or certification processes. Consequently, any duties arising from these specifications will be enforced, if at all, by reference to other legal instruments, contractual arrangements, or administrative practice.

• No express right to legal tender status or monetary circulation mechanics is stated in the Determination. Although the instrument is titled and drafted as a Currency Determination and makes reference to the relevant Act, it does not itself set rules about spending, exchange rates, or acceptance obligations for third parties.

Practical implication of duties and rights

• The most concrete duties are those of manufacturing quality control and design fidelity: the minting process must meet the numerical tolerances (weight ± allowances, maximum dimensions) and visual inscriptions as recorded. Rights of reliance mean that collectors, dealers and regulators can point to the Schedule as the authoritative spec sheet for these coin issues.

The Determination contains no express enforcement provisions, penalty clauses or administrative sanctioning powers. Its operative text comprises a specification exercise: s 3 lists attributes for each Schedule item and s 4 preserves other determinations. The instrument does not state who enforces compliance with the Schedule, what administrative remedies exist should a minted coin deviate from the specification, or what criminal offences (if any) apply to non-compliant manufacture or misrepresentation.

Consequences and enforcement architecture by implication and cross-reference

• Enforcement, if needed, must therefore arise from other legal sources. Section 4 explicitly records that the Schedule “does not affect any other determination of the specifications of a coin”, implying the existence of other determinations or legal instruments that could contain enforcement mechanisms. The Determination itself does not identify those other determinations or the relevant enforcement bodies.

• Practical enforcement routes likely to be used in practice are administrative and contractual: procurement contracts between the mint and the Commonwealth or between the mint and distributors will customarily incorporate specification compliance clauses and remedies (the Determination, however, does not itself create such contractual rights). Similarly, regulatory or customs authorities may use these specifications as evidentiary sources when inspecting or classifying coins, but the Determination provides no statutory enforcement route.

• Consumer or commercial dispute resolution would proceed via ordinary civil remedies (misdescription, breach of contract, trade practices issues) where a coin supplied fails to match these statutory specifications, but the Determination does not itself create a private right of action or a statutory penalty.

Operational enforcement risks and gaps

• The absence of specified enforcement mechanisms in the Determination creates an implementation risk: if the mint or a third-party manufacturer were to produce coins not matching the Schedule, there is no immediate, self-contained penalty provision within this instrument to compel correction. That gap shifts reliance onto other statutory instruments, contractual arrangements or administrative goodwill.

• The Schedule’s tight numeric tolerances (weight and dimension tolerances) mean quality control failures would be technically detectable. However, the Determination provides no administrative process for verification sampling, certification, or recall. Where government or market participants require assurance of conformity, separate testing protocols and enforcement agreements must exist outside this instrument.

In short, the instrument is a standards-setting legal record without in-built enforcement mechanisms. Where enforcement is necessary, decision-makers and affected parties must look to other determinations, contracts, regulatory statutes or administrative processes to secure compliance and remedies.

The Determination identifies its statutory source , subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965 , and explicitly preserves the existence of other determinations. The instrument therefore sits as a subordinate legislative instrument that records technical specifications under the Currency Act. The text makes two explicit interactions.

1. Statutory foundation (s 3): The Determination is made “for subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965” (s 3). That linkage establishes that the Determination exercises delegated powers to specify coin attributes under the Currency Act framework. The Determination does not reproduce subsection 13A(1); it assumes the power exists and uses it to record the specifications in Schedule 1.

2. Non-displacement of other determinations (s 4): Section 4 states that the specifications “do not affect any other determination of the specifications of a coin.” The clause operates two ways: it prevents an inference that this Determination repeals or supersedes other determinations; and it indicates that other determinations remain operative and may coexist. The regulatory architecture therefore expects multiple determinations to cover different coin series, mints or other technical regimes.

Concrete implementation pathways and cross-references

• Administrative practice: Officials implementing coin issuance, procurement, minting and registration must coordinate the requirements of this Determination with other determinations under the same statutory power. Section 4 requires cross-referencing and reconciliation against pre-existing specifications.

• Evidence in other regulatory contexts: Because this Determination contains precise physical descriptors and inscriptions, other laws and agencies (for example customs classification, anti-counterfeiting or consumer law regimes) will use the Schedule as an authoritative reference when interpreting the identity of objects. The Determination does not state that it is conclusive in other statutory contexts, but its status as a legislative specification makes it a primary source for technical identification.

Limits on revealed interactions

• The Determination does not, on its face, reference taxation, customs, consumer protection, anti-money laundering or other regulatory statutes. Any such interaction will be by operation of law external to this instrument. For example, if another statute treats certain precious-metal coins differently for tax or regulatory purposes, that treatment is not addressed here.

• The instrument does not modify legal-tender status, exchangeability, seigniorage arrangements or payment system rules. Those matters lie elsewhere in the Currency Act or in other statutory/regulatory instruments; the Determination limits itself to technical specification.

Practical consequence for advisers

• Legal advisers and compliance professionals must treat this Determination as the technical specification sheet for the listed Perth Mint coin series, and must ensure that any regulatory or contractual obligations referring to coin attributes align with the wording in Schedule 1. Where other determinations exist, section 4 requires explicit reconciliation to avoid conflicting compliance instructions.

The Determination itself is dated 17 November 2004 and is titled Currency (Perth Mint) Determination 2004 (No. 4). The instrument contains no internal amendment schedule, saving clauses, or revocation language. The text includes commencement mechanics (s 2) , the Determination “commences on the date of its notification in the Gazette” , but does not include a history of earlier versions, nor does it mention subsequent amendments or revocations. The signature line identifies the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer as the maker.

What the instrument records and what it does not

• Recorded: the date of signature (17 November 2004), the maker (Chris Pearce, Parliamentary Secretary), and the contents of Schedule 1 (items 1-60). These are the operative historical data embedded in the instrument.

• Not recorded: there is no express schedule listing prior determinations amended or replaced by this instrument; there is no express amendment log indicating later changes; there is no notation of revocation of earlier determinations. Section 4 expressly prevents the Schedule from affecting other determinations, which suggests that prior determinations remain current outside this instrument.

Implications for amendment tracing and legal research

• Because the Determination contains no amendment history clause, researchers seeking changes to these coin specifications must look in subsequent legislative instruments, the Federal Register/Gazette entries and any officially maintained register of legislative instruments to find later determinations that alter, supplement or revoke items listed here. The instrument itself does not provide that trail.

• The title includes “(No. 4)” which implies this is not the first Perth Mint determination in 2004, but the instrument itself does not detail what (No. 1-3) covered. The existence of multiple determinations in the same year indicates an iterative or series-based approach to coin specification, but the Determination does not record interrelationship beyond the non-affecting clause in section 4.

Practical steps for those needing amendment information

• To establish the full amendment history and whether Schedule items were subsequently varied, parties must consult the Gazette notifications after the commencement date and any consolidated registers of legislative instruments kept by the responsible agency. The Determination provides no internal amendment trace; the text itself is a single static snapshot as at signature.

The Determination contains no information about litigation, and the Schedule does not reference any judicial decisions. The instrument is a specification instrument: it records technical parameters rather than legal disputes. The text contains no appellate or lower-court references, no declaratory provisions about contentious interpretation, and no reserved rights of action.

What is present and what can be said

• Present: the Determination records the name of the authorising official and the technical specifications in Schedule 1. It contains no adjudicative elements and no provisions invoking courts or dispute resolution mechanisms.

• Absent: there are no references to case law, no mention of litigation brought under this determination, and no procedural directions for contested interpretations of the Schedule. As a result, the instrument is unlikely, on its face, to create a distinct body of litigation-specific interpretive precedent referenced by the Schedule itself.

How litigation would proceed if it arose

• If a dispute arose about whether a manufactured coin complies with a Schedule item (for example, whether weight tolerances were breached or whether inscriptions match), the Determination would serve as primary evidence of the statutory specification. Any private or administrative dispute would then be resolved under the usual legal channels , civil actions for breach of contract, statutory actions under other applicable statutes, or administrative reviews depending on the context , but the Determination does not create a special litigation regime.

• The absence of procedural or enforcement clauses in the Determination means that litigation, if any, would rely on general principles of statutory interpretation, contract law and regulatory frameworks external to the instrument.

Research note

• This instrument alone does not reveal whether litigation has occurred. To locate any litigation involving these coin issues, search of judicial databases and Gazette notices would be necessary; the Determination provides the baseline terms that a litigant or court would use to frame technical disputes.

The Schedule records many precise technical and design elements; those details generate several practical pitfalls for mints, dealers, collectors and legal advisers. The following are concrete “watch-outs” grounded directly in the text.

1. Metal purity vs denomination mismatch

• The Schedule records extremely high metal purities: gold coins are “at least 99.99% gold” (multiple items), silver coins “at least 99.9% silver” (Items 31-40), and platinum coins “at least 99.95% platinum” (Items 41-60). Face denominations include relatively low nominal values ($5, $15, $50, $1). The instrument therefore creates the technical possibility that coins specified primarily as bullion-based issues may have intrinsic metal attributes that make their economic use different from everyday currency. The Determination does not address monetary circulation, redemption, or exchange, so stakeholders should not assume face value and metal value align in practice.

2. Tight weight tolerances demand manufacturing precision

• Many items specify narrow allowable variations (for example Item 1 gold coin: 15.594 g ± 0.040 g). Manufacturing and quality control processes must therefore be precise and documented. Failure to meet the tolerances would produce coins that, by the Schedule, do not conform to the legal specification for that item.

3. Design fidelity includes small textual and visual elements

• The obverse design is specified in standard legal language (a circle of raised beads enclosing specific inscriptions and an effigy and the monogram ‘IRB’). Reverse designs vary and include multiple specific inscriptions (e.g. the exact phrasing ‘KOOKABURRA 1/2 OZ 9999 GOLD’, the words ‘DISCOVER AUSTRALIA’, year and designer initials, and a mint mark ‘P’). Minor departures , wrong initials, omitted ‘P’, missing year, or variant punctuation , would technically produce a coin not matching the recorded specification.

4. Colour-washed and coloured representations

• Several silver and platinum items (for example Items 31-40 and Items 41-60) include language such as “colour washed” or “a coloured representation” of natural scenes or flowers. The Determination therefore records colour as an aspect of the legislative design for certain items. Implementation risk: printing, enamelling or colour application steps are additional production complexities; failure to reproduce the colour features could result in non-conformity.

5. Multiple similar items with subtle differences

• The Schedule contains numerous items that are superficially similar (for example multiple $50/$15/$5 triplets across animal themes and across years). Distributors and collectors must use the Schedule’s year, initials and inscriptions to differentiate issues correctly. Mislabelling a $15 “KOALA 1/10 OZ 9999 GOLD” as a different $15 issue would be an error against the statutory description.

6. “Maximum” dimensions rather than exact dimensions

• The Schedule lists “Maximum diameter” and “Maximum thickness” rather than exact or minimum dimensions. This could create ambiguity in assessing compliance where coins approach the maximum. Where accurate verification is required, stakeholders should note that the legal requirement is stated as a maximum, and the weight tolerances interact with dimensional tolerances in assessing conformity.

7. No enforcement or remedy path in this instrument

• If a coin does not meet the Schedule, this Determination provides no direct enforcement remedy. Parties cannot rely on the Determination alone for recall or sanction procedures; they must identify contractual or other statutory mechanisms to enforce conformity. Section 4’s non-affecting clause reinforces that other determinations may be relevant for remedying defects.

8. Obverse uniformity presumes an authorised effigy and monogram

• The obverse specification requires an effigy of Queen Elizabeth II and monogram ‘IRB’. This raises intellectual-property and portrait-right practicalities in production and licensing, which are not addressed in the Determination itself. Producers must ensure authorisation to use the effigy and monogram as specified.

9. Title reference to Perth Mint but no procedural reference to minting authority

• The instrument title names the Perth Mint and the text is a determination under the Currency Act. However, the Determination does not contain procedural guidance for allocation of mintage, distribution channels, or contractual arrangements to produce the coins. Those practicalities rest elsewhere.

10. Reconciliation requirement with other determinations

• Section 4 expressly preserves other determinations. Practitioners working with coin specifications must ensure they reconcile this Determination with any other in-force determinations to avoid contradictory obligations.

In short, the Schedule is precise and prescriptive, but its precision produces operational fragility: small departures in weight, composition, inscription, mint mark, or colour may produce non-conforming coins without an in-built statutory remedy in this instrument.

Compliance with this Determination is primarily technical and documentary. The instrument itself prescribes specifications and leaves implementation, enforcement and remedial arrangements to other instruments and administrative practice. Below are concrete steps and control points for producers, distributors and advisers, grounded in the wording of the Determination and Schedule 1.

1. Treat the Schedule as the definitive specification sheet (s 3; Schedule 1)

• Use each Schedule item as the authoritative record for denomination, composition, weight with tolerance, maximum diameter, maximum thickness, shape, edge, obverse inscriptions/design and reverse inscriptions/design. For operational purposes embed the Schedule text into manufacturing specifications, quality-control documents and marketing descriptions.

2. Quality control and measurement procedures

• Establish measurement protocols sufficient to verify compliance with “standard weight and allowable variation” for each item. For example, for an Item 1 gold coin specified as 15.594 g ± 0.040 g, build weighing and sampling processes that can detect deviations smaller than ±0.040 g. Maintain measurement traceability, calibration records for scales and sampling procedures to demonstrate conformity.

• Verify maximum diameter and thickness using calibrated callipers or micrometers. Since the Schedule records maximums, document measured distributions and tolerance control actions where items approach the upper bounds.

3. Composition verification

• Have metal assay or certification processes to verify the recorded minimum purities (“at least 99.99% gold”, “at least 99.9% silver”, “at least 99.95% platinum”). Keep assay certificates, supplier delivery documentation and chain-of-custody records for precious-metal inputs, so that finished products can be traced to verified material inputs consistent with Schedule requirements.

4. Reproduce exact inscriptions and design elements

• The obverse is specified in consistent language across items (a bead circle and specific inscriptions plus the effigy and ‘IRB’ monogram). Reverse inscriptions include precise wording, weight/metal statements (e.g. ‘1/2 OZ 9999 GOLD’), series headings (‘DISCOVER AUSTRALIA’), year and initials and mint marks (‘P’). Ensure dies, artwork and finishing reproductions conform exactly to the statutory wording and monograms. Keep design masters and proofing records to demonstrate compliance.

• Where the Schedule specifies “colour washed” or “a coloured representation”, treat colour application as a material part of compliance. Document printing/enamel specifications and colour-matching approvals.

5. Record keeping, traceability and labeling

• Maintain a registry of production runs mapped to Schedule items (item number, year, designer initials, mintage quantities, assay certificates, weight measurements and packaging). For distribution, ensure product descriptions match the exact Schedule wording; avoid shorthand or inconsistent labels that could be problematic if challenged.

6. Reconcile with other determinations and legal instruments (s 4)

• Section 4 requires awareness of other determinations. Before declaring compliance to third parties or speculatively marketing an item as conforming to a Schedule item, confirm there are no subsequent or parallel determinations that modify the applicable specification. Maintain copies of in-force determinations and gazette notices to evidence the applicable specification at time of production.

7. Contract drafting and supply chain obligations

• Clause quality-control and conformity warranties in contracts with subcontractors and distributors, specifying that coins must match the particular Schedule item and indicate remedies for non-conformity. Since the Determination supplies no enforcement route, contractual remedies are the practical mechanism to secure compliance.

8. Consumer and dealer communications

• When reselling or certifying coins, include the Schedule item reference (for example “Perth Mint Determination 2004 (No. 4), Schedule Item 1”) on certificates of authenticity and product listings. Where colour or other finishing elements are part of the statutory description, disclose these features and any conditional statements around them.

9. Dispute readiness and external verification

• Prepare to support any dispute by compiling the Schedule item text, the production records, assay certificates, weighing records, die proofs and shipping documents. Because the Determination provides the specification but not enforcement procedures, a producer’s best protection is robust documentary proof of conformity.

10. Administrative steps for commencement and amendment monitoring

• Section 2 ties commencement to Gazette notification. Parties should confirm the gazettal date and ensure they are using the in-force version of the determination. Establish a docketing process to monitor the Gazette or any legislative instrument registers for subsequent amendments or other determinations referred to by s 4.

Practical final note

• The Determination is a technical legal specification. Compliance is therefore a mix of precision manufacturing, documentary record-keeping and contractual risk allocation. Because the instrument does not contain sanctioning or remedial clauses, practical compliance depends on well-specified supply contracts, robust quality control, and careful product descriptions that mirror the Schedule’s language exactly.