Liquor Control (Irrungadji Restricted Area) Regulations 2010

These regulations declare the Irrungadji Aboriginal Community a liquor restricted area under the Liquor Control Act 1988 and impose a set of concrete, time‑limited prohibitions, notice obligations and enforcement powers that apply within the area as described by land parcels. Regulation 5 declares the area to be a restricted area for the purposes of section 175(1a) of the Act (reg 5). Regulation 3 defines the restricted land precisely by reference to two lot numbers and their records in the Western Australian land title registers (reg 3). Regulation 7 creates criminal offences for bringing liquor into, causing liquor to be brought into, or possessing liquor within that defined area, and specifies two tiers of penalty with a higher fine imposed where the offender is a licensee, manager of licensed premises, or director of a body corporate that holds a liquor licence (reg 7(1)-(2)). Regulation 6 requires the Director of Liquor Licensing to take “all reasonable steps” to post and maintain signage at each place where a customary access route enters the area, describing the offences in regulation 7 and the penalties for them; however a failure to comply with that posting obligation does not invalidate the declaration in regulation 5 (reg 6(1)-(2)). Regulation 8 confers on a member of the Police Force the power to seize and, as soon as practicable, dispose of any opened or unopened container of liquor suspected on reasonable grounds to be the subject of an offence under regulation 7, expressly despite the limits in section 155(4) and (5) of the Act (reg 8). The instrument has a fixed expiry: unless sooner repealed it remains in effect until the close of 4 December 2028 (reg 9). The regulations commenced in two stages: citation and commencement provisions on the date of Gazette publication and the remainder on the following day (reg 2), and the compilation table records later amendment instruments and commencement dates.

Mechanically, the instrument turns a geographically‑defined parcel of land into a statutory restricted area under an existing policing and licensing regime, attaches criminal liability for the importation and possession of alcohol within that parcel (with enhanced fines for persons connected to liquor licences), requires the Director of Liquor Licensing to display notices at customary access points, and expands police disposal powers for suspected containers. The legal effect of the restriction continues regardless of whether the Director has succeeded in posting the required notices (reg 6(2)). The restriction and its policing powers are in force only for the specified statutory duration unless repealed earlier (reg 9).

The regulations rest on a small number of interlocking statutory concepts that determine scope, duties, offending conduct and enforcement. The core concepts are: the defined restricted area, the notice‑posting duty, the prohibited conduct, the differentiated penalty regime, the police seizure and disposal power, and the temporal limitation of the regulations.

1. Defined restricted area. The instrument defines “Irrungadji Aboriginal Community” by reference to two cadastral parcels: Lot 204 on Deposited Plan 183007 (Volume LR3051 Folio 972) and Lot 351 on Deposited Plan 405537 (Volume LR3021 Folio 707) (reg 3). This is the legal spatial boundary for all the prohibitions and obligations in the instrument. The concept is precise in that it uses lot numbers and title records rather than a descriptive perimeter, so the boundary is the cadastral title boundary. Regulation 3 was later amended (see compilation/amendment entries).

2. Notice posting at customary access routes. The Director of Liquor Licensing must take all reasonable steps to cause a notice that describes the offences in regulation 7 and specifies the penalties to be posted, and to keep those notices posted, at each place where a customary access route enters the defined community (reg 6(1)). “Customary access route” is not defined in the instrument itself; the requirement therefore imports some factual determination in practice about where customary access routes enter the land.

3. Prohibited conduct and causation. Regulation 7(1) criminalises three types of conduct in the area: bringing liquor into the area, causing liquor to be brought into the area, and possessing liquor within the area. The “causes to be brought into” wording extends beyond physical carriage by the person themselves and can capture conduct that results in liquor being brought in by another person or by delivery. The provision therefore targets both direct and indirect importation and possession of liquor within the defined area.

4. Differentiated penalties. The instrument sets two penalty levels: a base fine of $2,000 for an offence under regulation 7(1) and an elevated fine of $5,000 where the offender is a licensee, a manager of licensed premises or a director of a body corporate that holds a licence (reg 7). The differentiation creates a higher financial exposure for persons formally involved in licensed liquor supply.

5. Police seizure and disposal power. Regulation 8 authorises a police officer, despite certain provisions of the Act (s 155(4) and (5)), to seize and, as soon as practicable, dispose of any opened or unopened container of liquor suspected on reasonable grounds to be subject to an offence under regulation 7. The “despite” language indicates the regulation overrides the limits in s 155(4) and (5) with respect to these containers in the restricted area.

The regulations create obligations and liabilities that fall on defined public officials, licence‑holders and private individuals or entities that bring liquor into the area or possess it there. The principal affected parties, as directly indicated by the instrument, are as follows.

• Residents, visitors and persons present in the Irrungadji Aboriginal Community. Any person who brings liquor into, causes liquor to be brought into, or has liquor in their possession in the restricted area commits an offence under regulation 7(1). That category includes private individuals, family members, guests, contractors, delivery drivers and visitors. The prohibition applies to both opened and unopened containers by virtue of the seizure power in reg 8.

• Licensees, managers of licensed premises and directors of bodies corporate that hold licences. These persons face higher fines if they contravene the prohibition (reg 7(2)). The instrument explicitly identifies these occupational categories as a distinct class for higher penalty exposure, which affects persons with formal roles in the liquor industry even if the act of bringing in liquor may be indirect or caused by their agents (the regulation captures “causes liquor to be brought into”).

• Suppliers, delivery agents and third parties who “cause” liquor to be brought in. The statutory language in reg 7(1)(a) and the “causes” formulation capture persons whose actions result in liquor being brought into the restricted area by another person or by delivery, so businesses supplying liquor must assess whether their delivery practices, contracts or distribution arrangements could expose them to offence liability when the destination is within the defined lots.

• The Director of Liquor Licensing. The Director has a statutory duty to take all reasonable steps to post and maintain notices at customary access routes that enter the area, describing the offences and penalties (reg 6(1)). The obligation is procedural and ongoing for the duration of the restricted area declaration; the regulation also states that failure to comply with the posting obligation does not invalidate the declaration (reg 6(2)), which affects the Director’s exposure to legal challenge regarding validity.

• Police officers. Members of the Police Force are empowered to seize and dispose of suspected containers on reasonable grounds for suspected offences under regulation 7, and are authorised to do so “as soon as is practicable” (reg 8). This confers a proactive enforcement role on police with specific powers in the restricted area.

The instrument imposes a narrow set of duties and confers specific enforcement rights; it does not create broad administrative regimes or licensing changes beyond the restricted area declaration and its operational consequences.

Duties

• Duty to refrain from bringing liquor into the area or possessing liquor there. Regulation 7(1) makes it an offence to bring liquor into, cause liquor to be brought into, or have liquor in possession in the Irrungadji Aboriginal Community. That is a direct behavioural duty on persons who may enter or otherwise deal with the area (reg 7(1)).

• Duty on the Director of Liquor Licensing to post notices. Under regulation 6(1) the Director must take all reasonable steps to have notices posted and kept posted at each place where a customary access route enters the community. The notices must describe the offences in regulation 7 and specify the penalties for those offences. This is a statutory duty of procedure and public information for the Director’s office (reg 6(1)).

• Ongoing obligation to keep notices posted while the area remains restricted. The duty is not a one‑off; the Director must ensure notices are kept posted for the duration of the restricted area’s operation (reg 6(1)).

Rights and powers

• Police power of seizure and disposal. Regulation 8 authorises members of the Police Force to seize and dispose, as soon as practicable, any opened or unopened container of liquor suspected on reasonable grounds to be the subject of an offence under regulation 7. This power is exercisable notwithstanding section 155(4) and (5) of the Liquor Control Act, which the regulations identify as limitations being displaced in this context (reg 8).

• Right of the restricted area declaration to remain valid despite posting failures. Regulation 6(2) makes clear that a failure by the Director to comply with the posting obligation does not invalidate the declaration in regulation 5. The effect is that the legal status of the restricted area does not depend on successful signage placement (reg 6(2)).

• Statutory right to apply the enhanced penalty framework. The instrument creates a distinct, heightened penalty for certain occupational categories (licensees, managers or directors), and that entitlement for the State to impose higher fines is embedded in the regulations (reg 7(2)).

Operational obligations and constraints

The regulatory instrument sets out fixed monetary fines for contraventions and specific enforcement powers for police; it does not provide for custodial penalties or alternative sanctions within the text.

Penalty structure

• Base penalty. Regulation 7(1) and the following penalty provision specify that a person committing an offence under reg 7(1) (bringing, causing to be brought, or possessing liquor in the area) is liable to a fine of $2,000 in “any other case” (reg 7(1), penalty provision).

• Elevated penalty for licence‑connected persons. If the offender is a licensee, a manager of licensed premises or a director of a body corporate that holds a licence, the fine for the offence is $5,000 (reg 7(2)). The instrument therefore imposes a higher financial penalty on persons engaged in the licensed liquor industry for the same prohibited conduct within the area.

Enforcement powers

• Seizure and disposal. Regulation 8 allows a member of the Police Force to seize and, “as soon as is practicable, dispose of” any opened or unopened container of liquor suspected on reasonable grounds to be the subject of an offence under reg 7. This is an express expansion of enforcement levers available to police within the restricted area (reg 8). The use of “as soon as is practicable” signals an operational expectation of prompt disposal following seizure.

• Overriding s 155(4) and (5) of the Act. The regulation operates “despite” section 155(4) and (5) of the Liquor Control Act 1988; the textual interaction in the instrument makes clear that, for suspected containers within the restricted area, police may act in ways that s 155(4) and (5) might otherwise constrain (reg 8).

Legal standards and evidential thresholds

• “Suspected on reasonable grounds”. The threshold for seizure under reg 8 is reasonable grounds to suspect the container is the subject of an offence under reg 7. The regulation therefore embeds the ordinary legal standard of reasonable suspicion for police actions. The instrument does not define reasonable grounds beyond that phrase; the assessment will be fact‑specific and subject to standard legal review if contested.

• No express requirement for prior judicial authorisation. The regulation does not require police to obtain prior judicial or administrative authorisation to seize or dispose of containers that are reasonably suspected to be subject to the offence; the authority is statutory and immediate in character where the grounds exist.

The regulations are made under and operate in conjunction with the Liquor Control Act 1988 and expressly reference specific sections of that Act. The instrument is subordinate legislation that both applies the Act’s mechanisms for restricted areas and modifies the application of certain Act provisions in the defined circumstances.

• Declaration under the Liquor Control Act. Regulation 5 declares the Irrungadji Aboriginal Community to be a restricted area “for the purposes of section 175(1a) of the Act” (reg 5). That citation locates the instrument’s authority in the Act and indicates that the regulation invokes the Act’s framework for restricted areas. The regulations implement a specific application of s 175(1a) to the named parcels.

• Interaction with s 155(4) and (5). Regulation 8 begins with “Despite section 155(4) and (5) of the Act,” and then authorises police to seize and dispose of suspected containers of liquor as soon as practicable. That expresses an express displacement of the operation of s 155(4) and (5) in the restricted area context, allowing police to take more immediate disposal action than those subsections might permit elsewhere (reg 8). The instrument therefore both relies on the Act for its validity and exempts its enforcement operations in a particular respect from a procedural constraint in the Act.

• Subordinate legislation and Gazette notices. The regulations include standard commencement and citation clauses (reg 1-2) and a compilation table that records amendment instruments, publication pages and commencement dates. These show that the regulations are enacted as subordinate legislation under the Act and are modified by later regulations and statutory instruments (compilation table).

• No express interaction with local government or land law obligations. The instrument defines land by lot numbers but does not amend property rights or impose obligations on landholders other than the general prohibitions applying to persons within the boundary. The regulations do not purport to alter land title, native title, planning law, trespass law, or local government regulatory regimes; they operate as public order and licensing regulation within the scope of the Liquor Control Act.

• Evidence and criminal procedure. While the instrument creates offences and confers seizure powers, it does not change evidence standards, criminal procedure, or sentencing frameworks beyond the specified fines and the disposal authority. Those matters remain governed by general criminal law and the Act’s wider procedural rules.

The instrument contains a built‑in history of amendments and commencement dates in its compilation table and notes. The key entries in the compilation table and the text of the regulations summarise the following legislative timeline as recorded in the instrument.

• Original instrument. Liquor Control (Irrungadji Restricted Area) Regulations 2010 were published 3 December 2010 and commenced in stages: regulations 1 and 2 on 3 December 2010 and the rest on 4 December 2010 (see reg 2 and compilation table entry for 2010).

• Amendment 2013. Liquor Control (Irrungadji Restricted Area) Amendment Regulations 2013 were published 15 November 2013; the citation shows the usual staged commencement (reg 2 in the amending instrument on 15 November 2013 and the remaining regulations on 16 November 2013). The compilation table records the 2013 instrument but the body text does not specify which provisions it altered; readers should consult the amending instrument for the precise changes.

• Amendment 2016. Liquor Control (Irrungadji Restricted Area) Amendment Regulations 2016 were published 28 October 2016 and came into operation for the citation and commencement provisions on 28 October 2016 and for the remaining provisions on 29 October 2016 (compilation table). The instrument’s text notes that regulation 4 was deleted by Gazette 28 Oct 2016 p. 4917, indicating a direct amendment to the regulations’ internal numbering and content.

• Amendment 2019. Racing and Gaming Regulations Amendment (Liquor Control) Regulations (No. 2) 2019 Pt. 2, published 29 November 2019 p. 4106-7, commenced on 30 November 2019 for the regulations other than citation and commencement (compilation table). Regulation 3 includes a bracketed note that it was amended: “Regulation 3 amended: Gazette 29 Nov 2019 p. 4106.”

• Amendment 2022. Racing and Gaming Regulations Amendment (Liquor Control) Regulations (No. 4) 2022 Pt. 2, published 18 November 2022 (SL 2022/199), commenced on 19 November 2022 for the relevant parts (compilation table records commencement).

• Amendment 2023. Racing and Gaming Regulations Amendment (Liquor Control) Regulations (No. 2) 2023 Pt. 2, published 12 July 2023 (SL 2023/109), commenced on 13 July 2023 for the relevant parts (compilation table).

• Expiry provision and insertions. Regulation 9 was inserted by Gazette 28 October 2016 p. 4917 and has been amended subsequently (reg 9 notes: inserted 28 Oct 2016; amended 29 Nov 2019; amended SL 2022/199 r. 4; SL 2023/109 r. 4). The compiled note reiterates that these regulations expire at the close of 4 December 2028 (reg 9; compilation table and other notes).

The regulatory text and its compilation notes do not include any references to judicial or tribunal decisions interpreting these regulations. The instrument contains a compilation table, commencement and amendment notes, but no section cites case law or lists any statutory challenges or judicial determinations.

• No cases recorded in the instrument. The text supplied does not enumerate any litigation, judicial review proceedings, or prosecutorial outcomes related to these regulations. Where subordinate legislation has produced contested issues that reached courts, those decisions would typically not appear in the regulation text but in independent case law reporting and judicial databases. The instrument itself remains silent on any such material.

• Implications for practitioners. The absence of recorded litigation in this document means that those relying on the instrument must look to external legal databases and reported decisions to identify any judicial treatment of the restricted area regime, the interpretation of phrases such as “causes liquor to be brought into” or “customary access route”, or challenges to police disposal powers despite s 155(4) and (5). The instrument’s text alone provides the statutory language and amendment history but does not disclose whether or how courts have interpreted its provisions.

• Evidential matters and likely areas of litigation. Based solely on the language of the instrument, factual disputes that could give rise to litigation include whether a person “caused” liquor to be brought into the area, what constitutes reasonable grounds for police seizure, whether the Director took “all reasonable steps” to post notices, and the legality and reasonableness of disposal actions. The instrument does not contain any prescribed internal review or appeal routes specific to these regulations; challenges would proceed under general administrative law, criminal procedure and property law avenues if litigated.

• Practical note. For an up‑to‑date assessment of litigation that engages these regulations, practitioners should consult case law databases and court registries. The regulatory text as provided does not present any reported decisions, and no litigation summary appears in the compilation notes.

The regulations are short and tightly drafted, but they contain several provisions and word choices that create operational uncertainties and potential legal pitfalls for different actors. The following are concrete attention points drawn from the text.

• Posting failure does not remove the legal effect of the restriction. Regulation 6(2) states that a failure to comply with the Director’s posting obligation does not invalidate the declaration in regulation 5. Practically, the community and users might rely on signage to know the law; legally, the restriction exists irrespective of whether signage was posted. That means persons can still be prosecuted even if notices are not visible or present, and licensees cannot avoid liability by arguing lack of posted notice (reg 6(2)).

• “Causes liquor to be brought into” is broad. Regulation 7(1)(a) criminalises not only physically carrying liquor into the area but also “causes liquor to be brought into” the area. That phrase captures indirect conduct: arranging deliveries, instructing someone to bring liquor in, or facilitating transport to the restricted area could expose a person or business to liability. Licensees, suppliers and delivery services should treat destinations in the defined lots as potentially off‑limits or require compliance checks to avoid causing liquor to be brought there (reg 7(1)(a)).

• Higher fines for licensees and related officers without qualification. Regulation 7(2) elevates the fine to $5,000 for offences committed by a licensee, a manager of licensed premises or a director of a corporate licence holder. The instrument does not require a particular fault standard beyond committing the offence. Individuals in those named roles therefore face higher financial exposure and must ensure staff and agents do not bring liquor into the area (reg 7(2)).

• “Customary access route” is not defined. Regulation 6(1) requires notices at each place where a customary access route enters the community; the term is not defined in the instrument itself. That raises practical uncertainty about where precisely signage must be placed. The determination of customary access routes will be factual and could be contested in disputes about adequacy of notice or about whether the Director took “all reasonable steps” (reg 6(1)).

• Police disposal may be immediate and irreversible. Regulation 8 permits the police to seize and, as soon as practicable, dispose of opened or unopened containers suspected on reasonable grounds to be the subject of an offence under regulation 7. Disposal may be irreversible and destroy private property value; the instrument contains no mechanism for preservation pending prosecution or for compensation for disposal (reg 8).

Compliance obligations fall on a narrow set of actors and are mostly behavioural or administrative. Addressing compliance requires distinct steps for (a) individuals and visitors, (b) licensees and liquor suppliers, (c) the Director of Liquor Licensing, and (d) police and enforcement agencies. The following practical measures follow from the text of the regulations.

Individuals and visitors

• Do not bring liquor into the defined lots. Under reg 7(1) any person who brings liquor into or has liquor in their possession in the Irrungadji Aboriginal Community commits an offence. The practical compliance measure is to avoid transporting, carrying or possessing liquor within the cadastral boundaries defined in reg 3.

• Avoid arranging for others to bring liquor in. Because the prohibition includes “causes liquor to be brought into,” avoid directing, arranging or facilitating third parties to bring liquor into the community, including informal transfers and deliveries (reg 7(1)(a)).

• Observe posted notices. Although the legal validity of the restriction does not depend on notice (reg 6(2)), posted notices describe the offences and penalties and provide practical guidance; individuals should comply with signs at customary entry points where they exist (reg 6(1)).

Licensees, managers, corporate directors and suppliers

• Implement destination exclusion in supply chains. Businesses that sell or deliver liquor should implement systems to flag the defined lot numbers as restricted destinations and refuse orders or deliveries to those lot addresses. The “causes” language in reg 7(1)(a) means failure to do so could expose suppliers and carriers to offence liability.

• Update training and operational procedures. Licensees, managers and directors face elevated fines (reg 7(2)). They should train staff about prohibited destinations, implement delivery checks, and create written policies that prohibit employees from accepting orders or delivering liquor to the Irrungadji community.

• Maintain records of refusal and instruction. Keeping contemporaneous records of refused transactions and instructions to staff not to deliver to the identified lots will assist in defending any allegation that a supplier or licensee “caused” liquor to be brought into the area.

• Seek legal clarity on edge cases. For complex arrangements,e.g., hospitality events, transfers into privately owned property within the lots,obtain legal advice about whether any lawful route exists to lawfully bring liquor in (the instrument contains no exemptions).