Land Information Authority Regulations 2007

The central concept is fundamental land information. The regulations do not define it directly , instead, they list the categories of State land information that qualify. The term “fundamental” connotes that the data is essential to the functioning of land markets, government administration, and private decision‑making, and that it should be available without the Authority imposing its usual commercial terms. The underlying assumption is that these data sets have been collected primarily with public funding (through the State Land Information Capture Program and other government survey activities) and that restricting access would impose deadweight costs on the economy.

State land information is defined as information about, or related to, any point, line, surface, or space located within Western Australia, Christmas Island, or the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. This is an extremely broad territorial scope, encompassing the entire State and the Indian Ocean Territories. The definition is not limited to information held by the Authority; it extends to any information meeting the geographic criterion, though in practice the regulation only covers what the Authority holds or produces.

Basic topographic information is a subset of topographic information (the topography of the surface, including natural and built features) that has not been modified to meet a specific person’s requirements. This carve‑out prevents a person from commissioning customised topographic data and then demanding that the Authority make the modified version available as fundamental information. The Authority can still sell customised products commercially; only the raw or standard version is fundamental.

The definition of lot is critical because category (f) makes lot boundaries fundamental, but with exclusions for strata schemes and community titles (building) schemes. The broad definition covers most freehold and Crown land lots, but excludes volumetric lots in multi‑storey buildings. This likely reflects the complexity and cost of maintaining three‑dimensional boundary data, or a policy decision that such data remains a commercial product.

Property address requires, in addition to the usual road name, number, suburb, and postcode, the latitude and longitude coordinates of the site. This elevates coordinate data to a required element of the fundamental property address, not merely a supplementary attribute. It has implications for any address database that omits coordinates , it would not be a “property address” for fundamental purposes unless coordinates are included.

Tenure data includes the name of the proprietor (the registered owner under the Transfer of Land Act 1893). This means that fundamental land information includes personal details of landholders. The regulation does not impose any privacy safeguards; it simply requires that the Authority provide this data as fundamental. The tension between open access and privacy is not addressed in the regulations themselves, leaving it to other laws (such as the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) or the Freedom of Information Act 1992 (WA)) to moderate.

Reserve data includes not only current reserves but also past reserves, with history of changes, cancellations, and management. This creates a longitudinal record that is fundamental, which may assist researchers and planners but also imposes a compliance burden on the Authority to maintain historical data.

Geodetic survey marks are defined by reference to the Geocentric Datum of Australia 2020, a Commonwealth‑determined standard. This ties the fundamental status of survey mark locations to a specific federal instrument, creating potential obsolescence if the Commonwealth updates the determination without a corresponding WA regulation amendment.

The territorial sea baseline is defined by reference to the Commonwealth Seas and Submerged Lands Act 1973, section 7. This means that any changes to the baseline under Commonwealth law automatically alter the scope of fundamental maritime zone boundaries, without WA needing to amend the regulations.

The exclusively requirement appears frequently: the information must consist “exclusively” of the described content. For example, category (a) requires State land information that consists exclusively of basic topographic information. If the data contains both basic topographic information and some other information (e.g., cadastral boundaries), the whole set is not fundamental under category (a) , it might be fundamental under another category if it meets that category’s exclusive test. This fragmentation means that composite data sets may fall outside the fundamental regime entirely, unless they are broken into single‑theme layers.

The regulations directly affect the Land Information Authority (the body corporate established under the Act). The Authority is the primary duty‑bearer: it must identify which data sets in its possession fall within the prescribed categories and then make them available on terms consistent with their fundamental status. This imposes a significant administrative and systems burden , classifying data, ensuring that only the prescribed categories are released as fundamental, and preventing inadvertent cross‑subsidisation between fundamental and commercial products.

Users of land information are the intended beneficiaries. This category includes land surveyors, conveyancers, property developers, local governments, State agencies, utilities (water, electricity, gas), mining and resources companies, environmental consultants, real estate agents, journalists, researchers, and the general public. For these users, the regulations reduce the cost and friction of accessing core land data. A surveyor can obtain geodetic survey mark locations and lot boundaries without negotiating a licence fee; a conveyancer can access tenure data (including proprietor names) to verify ownership; a journalist can map property addresses and coordinates; a researcher can analyse reserve data over time.

Private proprietors are affected because their names appear in tenure data that becomes fundamental land information. A proprietor who values privacy may object to having their name and property details publicly available at marginal cost. The regulations create no opt‑out mechanism. Proprietors of strata or community titles building lots are indirectly affected because lot boundaries for those schemes are excluded from fundamental status, meaning the Authority may continue to charge commercially for that data. This creates an unequal treatment between Torrens system lots and strata lots.

Local governments are affected in two ways. First, the boundaries of districts and wards (Schedule 1 item 7) are fundamental, so councils must ensure their boundary data is accurate and supplied to the Authority. Second, local governments themselves are users of fundamental data , they can access lot boundaries, property addresses, and topographic information at reduced cost for planning and infrastructure management.

State agencies listed in Schedule 1 (such as the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions for conservation parks; the Water Corporation for catchment areas; port authorities) are affected because their reserve data and statutory boundaries become fundamental. They must cooperate with the Authority to ensure that the relevant data is provided and maintained. The regulation creates a de facto obligation on these agencies to feed their boundary and reserve data into the Authority’s systems.

The Commonwealth is indirectly affected because the regulations incorporate Commonwealth definitions (Geocentric Datum of Australia 2020, Australian Postal Corporation, Seas and Submerged Lands Act). Changes to those Commonwealth laws or determinations can alter the scope of WA fundamental land information without WA legislative action.

Private data providers who hold State land information not held by the Authority are not directly regulated, but if they seek to commercialise their data they may face competition from the Authority’s fundamental data offerings, which are available at near‑cost. This could reduce the commercial viability of private land information products in the categories listed.

The regulations impose a single express duty: the Authority must treat the prescribed information as fundamental land information for the purposes of section 16(4) of the Act. The content of that duty is not spelled out in the regulations, but it is implicit that the Authority must:

• Identify which data sets it holds (or can produce) that fall within the definitions.
• Maintain those data sets in a form that meets the precise definitional requirements (e.g., for aerial images, ensuring they have been modified only to remove distortions from lens, curvature, and motion, and are in digital form with visible‑light capture).
• Make the data available to requesters without imposing terms that are inconsistent with fundamental status , likely meaning no licence restrictions that inhibit reuse, and at a price no higher than the marginal cost of supply (though the regulations do not specify the pricing model).
• Provide the data in a timely manner upon request.

Rights of users are not stated in the regulations but arise from the Act. A user has the right to request fundamental land information and to receive it on the statutory terms. If the Authority refuses or imposes excessive conditions, the user may have grounds for judicial review or a complaint under the Act. The regulations also implicitly give users the right to rely on the accuracy of the data as supplied, though the Act may contain disclaimers.

Limitations on rights are embedded in the definitions. The “exclusively” requirement means that a user cannot demand a composite product , they can only obtain data sets that consist solely of the fundamental category. For example, to get lot boundaries, the user must request only lot boundary data, not a map that also shows topographic features (unless that map falls under a different fundamental category). This creates a fragmentation that may increase transaction costs for users who need multiple layers; they may need to make separate requests and then integrate the data themselves.

Restrictions on the Authority’s ability to commercialise are the core of the regulations. The Authority cannot treat fundamental data as a proprietary asset to be licensed at market rates. This limits the Authority’s revenue‑raising ability and may reduce its incentive to invest in data quality if the primary reward is not financial but reputational or statutory. Conversely, the regulations protect users from being held hostage by a monopoly provider.

Right to use without further permission: the regulations do not specify that fundamental data is free of intellectual property restrictions. The data may still be subject to Crown copyright or database rights. However, the classification as fundamental likely implies that the Authority cannot assert copyright to restrict reuse , the data is intended for public use. Users should verify the applicable licensing terms from the Authority’s data release policies.

Data subject rights: proprietors whose names appear in tenure data have no express right under the regulations to prevent disclosure. Their only recourse may be under privacy laws, but those laws may exempt government data collections for land administration. The regulations do not balance the right to privacy against the public benefit of open land data.

The regulations themselves contain no penalty provisions. They are a delegated instrument that prescribes information categories; enforcement of the duty to supply fundamental land information would be under the parent Act , the Land Information Authority Act 2006. That Act is not provided, but typically such legislation would include mechanisms for:

• Complaints to the Minister or an independent review body about failure to provide fundamental data.
• Administrative law remedies (e.g., judicial review of a decision to deny access).
• Civil penalties if the Authority charges above the prescribed fee (if any).
• Possibly a statutory review process leading to ministerial direction.

The regulations do not create any offence provisions. There are no fines or imprisonment for non‑compliance by the Authority. A private party that misuses fundamental data (e.g., by accessing tenure data for improper purposes) is not penalised under these regulations; other laws (privacy, criminal codes) would apply.

Enforcement risks for the Authority are primarily reputational and political. If the Authority systematically refuses to provide fundamental data, it may face adverse media coverage, parliamentary scrutiny, or legal action by affected users. The lack of a specific penalty weakens the enforcement regime , the regulations impose a duty but do not back it with a credible sanction. Users may need to litigate to enforce their rights, which is costly and uncertain.

Enforcement risks for users arise if a user mistakenly requests data that falls outside the fundamental categories (e.g., modified topographic information) and the Authority provides it under a commercial licence , the user cannot later claim it should have been free. Due diligence is required to ensure the requested data meets the definition (especially the “exclusively” test).

No independent regulator is established by the regulations. The Authority itself is the entity that classifies and supplies the data. There is no external body to audit whether the Authority is correctly applying the definitions. This creates a potential conflict of interest: the Authority has an incentive to narrowly interpret the categories to retain more data for commercial exploitation. Users bear the burden of challenging overly restrictive interpretations.

No provision for penalties against third parties who misappropriate fundamental data. The regulations do not create a property right in the data. The Authority may rely on general copyright or database protection, but those are not specific to these regulations.

Historical enforcement: there is no litigation history disclosed in the regulations or compilation table. This suggests that, as of the last amendment (2021), no reported cases have tested the boundaries of the fundamental land information definition. That may indicate either that the Authority is cooperative, or that the data landscape is too new or too obscure to have generated disputes. Users should not assume that enforcement is unnecessary , a future dispute could clarify the meaning of “exclusively” or “modified to meet the requirements of a person”.

The regulations explicitly incorporate or reference numerous other Western Australian and Commonwealth laws. The interaction is multi‑layered:

Transfer of Land Act 1893: definitions of “certificate of title” and “proprietor” are taken from this Act. Tenure data is defined by reference to certificates of title registered under that Act. Fundamental lot boundaries under category (f) include lots depicted on plans that are the subject of a certificate of title. This means that changes to the Torrens system , such as electronic titling or new forms of title , could affect what constitutes tenure data.

Land Administration Act 1997: definitions of “Crown land”, “private road”, “road”, and “unallocated Crown land” are used. Schedule 1 refers to land districts, divisions of the State, and townsites under this Act. Reserve data is also defined with reference to classifications under this Act (class A, B, C reserves). The interaction is extensive; any amendment to the Land Administration Act that redefines these terms would indirectly affect the scope of fundamental land information unless the regulations are updated.

Conservation and Land Management Act 1984: Schedule 1 item 1 lists conservation parks, marine reserves, national parks, etc. defined under this Act. Boundaries of these areas become fundamental under category (b). The relevant State agency (DBCA) must supply boundary data that aligns with its statutory definitions.

Local Government Act 1995: Schedule 1 items 6 and 7 refer to townsites, districts, and wards under this Act. Local government boundaries are fundamental. This creates a need for local governments to coordinate with the Authority to ensure their boundary changes are reflected in fundamental data.

Planning and Development Act 2005: the definition of “lot” includes lots depicted on a plan of survey of a subdivision approved by the Western Australian Planning Commission. This links fundamental land information to the planning approval process.

Strata Titles Act 1985 and Community Titles Act 2018: exclusions for strata schemes and community titles (building) schemes from category (f). These Acts define the exclusions. Notably, the 2021 amendment (SL 2021/74) inserted the explicit reference to the Community Titles Act 2018, reflecting the new legislation. The interaction is that owners of land under these schemes cannot access lot boundary data as fundamental , they must rely on other categories or pay commercial prices.

Commonwealth Acts: the National Measurement Act 1960 (through the 2017 Determination), the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989 (defining postcode areas), and the Seas and Submerged Lands Act 1973 (defining territorial sea baseline) are incorporated by reference. This creates a cross‑jurisdictional dependency. If the Commonwealth repeals or amends these instruments, the WA regulations may become incoherent or outdated. For example, if Australia Post changes postcode boundaries, the fundamental postcode area data must change, but the regulation still references the Commonwealth Act definition , presumably the Authority would update its data automatically. However, if the Commonwealth determination of the geocentric datum is superseded, WA may need a fresh amendment.

Registration of Deeds Act 1856: the definition of “lot” includes a part‑lot shown on a conveyance registered under this old Act. This is a historical connection , modern land transactions are mostly under the Torrens system, but the regulation preserves fundamental status for a dwindling class of old system lots.

No direct interaction with the Freedom of Information Act 1992 (WA) is stated, but in practice, fundamental land information may be obtainable more cheaply and quickly under the regulations than under FOI. Conversely, tenure data that includes proprietor names might otherwise be exempt from FOI on privacy grounds; the regulations override that exemption by designating it fundamental.

No direct interaction with the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) , the regulations are silent on privacy. This creates a legal tension: the regulations compel disclosure of personal information (proprietor names) as fundamental data, but the Privacy Act may restrict how that data can be further used or disclosed by recipients. The regulations do not provide a statutory override of privacy law, leaving users to navigate both regimes.

The regulations were originally made on 21 December 2007, published in the Gazette on that date, and came into operation in stages: regulations 1 and 2 on the day of publication; the remainder (including regulation 3) on 22 December 2007. The original version established the initial list of fundamental land information categories (presumably similar to the current list but without Schedule 1 and with different definitions).

Amendment 1: Land Information Authority Amendment Regulations 2013 (Gazette 14 November 2013, operative 18 November 2013). This amendment inserted Schedule 1, which lists areas referred to in written laws that are the subject of category (b) in regulation 3(2). The schedule originally contained items 1 through 11. The amendment expanded the scope of fundamental boundaries by adding specific statutory areas such as conservation parks, water reserves, State corridor rights, land districts, townsites, districts and wards, departmental areas, Metropolitan Water Supply area, ports, and corridor land. This was a significant expansion of the fundamental regime , previously, boundaries of those areas may not have been fundamental.

Amendment 2: Lands Regulations Amendment (Geocentric Datum) Regulations 2020 Part 3 (SL 2020/64, published 22 May 2020, operative 1 July 2020). This amendment updated the definition of “Geocentric Datum of Australia 2020” and inserted the reference to the 2017 Determination. It also added definitions for “geodetic survey mark” and “territorial sea baseline”. The purpose was to modernise the coordinate reference system from the older datum to GDA2020. It also added category (e) (maritime zones by reference to territorial sea baseline) and category (h) (geodetic survey marks). This amendment reflected the Commonwealth’s adoption of GDA2020 and ensured that WA’s fundamental survey data remained aligned.

Amendment 3: Land Information Authority Amendment Regulations 2021 (SL 2021/74, published 18 June 2021, operative 30 June 2021). This amendment made several refinements: it added the exclusion for community titles (building) schemes in category (f)(ii) (reflecting the new Community Titles Act 2018); it added category (fa) for boundaries of unallocated Crown land; it added category (n) for raw satellite imagery; and it added category (o) for aerial photographic images collected under the State Land Information Capture Program with limited processing. It also amended the definition of “lot” to include conveyances registered under the Registration of Deeds Act 1856. This amendment broadened the fundamental data set to include more types of imagery and Crown land, and brought the regulations into line with new community titles legislation.

Compilation table: The regulations are compiled to incorporate these amendments up to SL 2021/74. The compilation date is not given but is presumably after 30 June 2021. No further amendments are listed.

Potential future amendments: Given the pattern of expansion and technical updates, future amendments may add new categories as technology evolves (e.g., LiDAR data, 3D city models) or adjust definitions in response to Commonwealth changes. The 2020 and 2021 amendments were driven by external legislative changes (GDA2020, Community Titles Act) rather than domestic policy reviews, suggesting that the regulations are reactive rather than proactive.

The regulations themselves contain no reference to any court cases. The compilation table and notes do not list any judicial decisions interpreting the regulations. As a result, the litigation history is essentially nil. There are no known reported judgments in Western Australia (or elsewhere) that have construed the meaning of “fundamental land information”, the “exclusively” requirement, or any of the intricate definitions.

This absence of litigation is notable. It may indicate that the Authority has applied the regulations cooperatively, that the data is not sufficiently contested to generate disputes, or that the regulations are relatively new and untested. However, the lack of judicial interpretation creates uncertainty for users. Key terms such as “exclusively” are ambiguous , for example, can a data set that contains both lot boundaries and road names be split into two fundamental layers, or does it fall outside both categories because neither subset is “exclusively” one type? The Authority’s internal interpretations may be the only guidance, and those are not publicly binding.

Potential flashpoints for future litigation include:

• A user seeks data that includes both lot boundaries and topographic features (e.g., a cadastral map overlaid on terrain). The Authority refuses, claiming the composite is not exclusively either category. The user argues that the underlying data sources are separately fundamental. The court would need to decide whether the Authority must split the data or whether the user can demand the composite.
• The Authority charges a fee for fundamental data that the user claims exceeds marginal cost. The regulations do not specify a fee, so the user must rely on the Act or general administrative law.
• A proprietor sues to prevent disclosure of their name in tenure data, arguing privacy rights. The court would weigh the fundamental status against common law privacy or the Privacy Act. The regulations provide no defence for the Authority.
• A dispute over whether aerial images have been modified beyond the permitted distortion corrections. The Authority may argue that colour balancing, stitching, or compression constitutes an impermissible modification. The user may argue that those are necessary to make the images usable.

Because there is no litigation history, any advice as to how the regulations will be applied must be cautious. The definitions are detailed but have not been stress‑tested. Practitioners should treat the text as the sole authority and be prepared for administrative rather than judicial resolution of ambiguities.

The regulations contain several traps for the unwary. The most significant is the “exclusively” qualifier that precedes many of the categories. A data set that mixes two fundamental types , for example, a geographic information system layer that contains both lot boundaries and property addresses , is not fundamental under either category (f) or (k) because it does not consist exclusively of one or the other. The user must request each layer separately. Even if the Authority can easily extract the two components, it may not be obliged to do so if its standard product is the composite. The regulation does not impose a duty to disaggregate. Users should specify exactly which fundamental category they are requesting and ensure the data set they receive matches that category.

The exclusion of strata and community titles building lots from category (f) is a major carve‑out. Anyone seeking boundary data for an apartment building or a community titles scheme must still pay commercial rates or rely on other categories (such as property addresses or aerial imagery). The definition of “lot” specifically excludes these by referring to definitions in the Strata Titles Act 1985 and Community Titles Act 2018. Note the wording: category (f) excludes a lot “in relation to a strata scheme” or “in relation to a community titles (building) scheme”. This captures all lots within such schemes, not just the common property. A user wanting the boundary of a unit lot cannot get it as fundamental.

Aerial photographic images under category (o) come with multiple restrictions. They must be collected with funding allocated under the State Land Information Capture Program , not with other funding. They must be captured in the visible‑light region only (no infrared or multispectral). They must be in digital form (not printed). They must be modified only to remove distortions caused by the camera lens, the curvature of the earth, and the motion of the aircraft. Any further modification , such as colour balancing, compression, or orthorectification for mapping purposes , removes the image from the fundamental category. The Authority may supply only raw or minimally processed images, which may be of limited use without further processing. Users should check the provenance and processing history.

Property addresses under category (k) require latitude and longitude coordinates. A simple street address without coordinates is not a “property address” as defined and therefore does not qualify as fundamental land information. The Authority may supply only those addresses for which it has computed coordinates. Rural properties without a computed coordinate may not be included. This could create a disparity between urban and rural data availability.

Tenure data includes the proprietor’s name. This is a privacy risk for individuals. The regulation does not restrict dissemination , a person can request tenure data for any lot and obtain the owner’s name and the date of registration. There is no provision to suppress names of vulnerable persons or public figures. Users who obtain this data should be aware that they may be covered by privacy laws restricting how they can use or disclose the information.

Reserve data includes information about past reserves, not just current ones. The definition requires “whether the reserve has been cancelled, and other information relating to past changes in the status or management of the reserve”. This imposes a record‑keeping burden on the Authority to maintain historical data, but also gives users access to information about lands that are no longer reserved. A user researching a property that was formerly a reserve can obtain the full history through this category.

Lot definition includes part‑lots shown on conveyances registered under the Registration of Deeds Act 1856. This is a very old Act. The definition means that some land interests from the 19th century that have never been brought under the Torrens system may still have fundamental boundary status if the part‑lot is depicted on a deposited plan. However, the practical difficulty of locating and digitising such old records may mean the Authority does not have this data, and the regulation does not require it to recreate it. The existence of a historic interest does not guarantee the data is available.

Satellite imagery under category (n) must be “presented in the form in which the images are received by the Authority”. This means no processing at all , not even georeferencing or cloud masking. The raw imagery may be of limited value for many users. The Authority is not required to provide processed satellite imagery as fundamental.

Postcode areas are defined by reference to Australia Post’s determinations under Commonwealth law. Australia Post may change postcodes without notice to the WA government. The Authority must keep up with those changes to ensure its fundamental data remains current. A user relying on postcode boundaries as fundamental data may find that the data is outdated if the Authority has not updated its records.

Geocentric Datum of Australia 2020 is defined by reference to the 2017 Determination as in force on 1 July 2020. If the Commonwealth issues a new determination that supersedes the 2017 Determination, the definition in regulation 3(1) will not automatically update , it is locked to the 1 July 2020 version. The Authority would need to amend the regulations to reference the new determination. In the interim, fundamental data may be based on an outdated datum. Users requiring the latest datum should verify.

Compliance with the regulations primarily falls on the Land Information Authority, but users and other stakeholders also have steps to take.

For the Land Information Authority, the core compliance obligation is to correctly classify its data holdings and to supply fundamental data on the appropriate terms. An Authority compliance program should include:

1. Data audit: catalogue all State land information held by the Authority. For each data set, determine whether it falls into one or more of the fifteen categories in regulation 3(2). Pay careful attention to the “exclusively” qualifier , composite data sets may need to be split into constituent layers. For example, a cadastral map that includes lot boundaries, road names, and property addresses may need to be offered as three separate fundamental products.

2. Classification decisions: document the reasoning for including or excluding a data set as fundamental. This protects against subsequent challenge and ensures consistency. Where definitions are ambiguous (e.g., what counts as “modification” of aerial images), the Authority should adopt a transparent policy and publish it.

3. Data maintenance: ensure that fundamental data sets are kept up to date. Tenure data must reflect current certificate of title information; reserve data must include historical changes; boundaries of Schedule 1 areas must be updated when the underlying legislation changes (e.g., when a new conservation park is declared). The Authority should establish liaison with other agencies (e.g., DBCA, local governments, Australia Post) to receive updates.

4. Access mechanisms: reasonable online download services or on‑request supply should be available. The Authority must not impose licence restrictions that would be inconsistent with fundamental status. It may set a fee, but that fee should be no higher than the marginal cost of supply (or as prescribed by the Act). The Authority should clearly advertise which data sets are fundamental and how to access them.

5. Record‑keeping: maintain records of requests and responses. If a request is denied because the data set does not qualify as fundamental, the Authority should provide a written explanation citing the relevant definition.

6. Periodic review: review the regulations regularly (e.g., every two years) to identify needed amendments , changes in Commonwealth determinations, new types of data collected, or new statutory boundaries that should be added to Schedule 1.

For users seeking fundamental land information, compliance is about making a proper request and verifying the response:

1. Identify the correct category: before requesting data, determine which of the fifteen categories (a) through (o) covers the information needed. Be specific. If you need lot boundaries, request category (f) data; do not request a product that mixes categories, as it may not be fundamental.

2. Check for exclusions: verify that the data is not excluded under the definition. For lot boundaries, confirm the lot is not part of a strata scheme or community titles building scheme. For aerial images, ensure they meet the funding, spectral, and processing restrictions.

3. Request in writing: make a clear written request to the Authority identifying the category and the geographic area. State that you are requesting fundamental land information under section 16(4) of the Act and these regulations.

4. Challenge refusals: if the Authority refuses or tries to charge a commercial fee, request a written explanation. If the explanation appears contrary to the regulations, consider seeking review through the Act’s complaint mechanism or obtaining legal advice.

5. Use the data lawfully: be aware that fundamental data may still be subject to copyright or privacy laws. Tenure data containing proprietor names should be handled in accordance with privacy obligations. Do not use the data for direct marketing or other purposes that might breach the Privacy Act.

6. Verify currency: ask the Authority when the data was last updated. If it relies on Commonwealth determinations or external boundaries, check whether the Authority has incorporated the latest version.

For other government agencies whose boundaries or reserves are in Schedule 1 or otherwise fundamental, compliance involves providing accurate and timely boundary data to the Authority. Agencies should:

• Appoint a liaison officer for land information matters.
• Notify the Authority promptly of any changes to statutory boundaries (e.g., new reserves, altered local government districts).
• Agree on data formats and update cycles with the Authority to ensure the fundamental data remains authoritative.

For private sector data providers who hold land information that they wish to commercialise, compliance means understanding which data sets are now available at marginal cost from the Authority. Competing with free (or near free) fundamental data may require offering value‑added services, customisation, or data integration that the Authority does not provide. Avoid claiming that your data is fundamental if it does not meet the definitions, as that could mislead customers.