Where to start with an Australian legal problem: plain-English guides, with the legislation and case law behind them.

Platform

Legislation
Cases
Guides
Find a lawyer
Absurdities
Ask Zoe
Graph
Recently analysed

Free tools

Bond claim checker
Barking dog and noise diary
Support at Home statement check
All tools

Lawyers: our picks

Zoe

Where to start with an Australian legal problem: plain-English guides, with the legislation and case law behind them.

Platform

Legislation
Cases
Guides
Find a lawyer
Absurdities
Ask Zoe
Graph
Recently analysed

Free tools

Bond claim checker
Barking dog and noise diary
Support at Home statement check
All tools

Lawyers: our picks

Lawyers in Sydney
Lawyers in Melbourne
Lawyers in Brisbane
Lawyers in Perth
Family lawyers
Employment lawyers
Criminal lawyers
Wills and estates lawyers
Find a lawyer

Company

Pricing
API
Privacy
Terms
Support
X
LinkedIn
Instagram

Jurisdictions

Commonwealth
New South Wales
Queensland
Victoria
Western Australia
South Australia
Tasmania
Australian Capital Territory
Northern Territory

Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.

Zoe

Legislation Cases Guides Find a lawyer Absurdities Ask Zoe Graph Pricing

Ask Zoe →

Home/Legislation/LIVESTOCK REGULATIONS 2009/23

NTIn ForceRegulation

LIVESTOCK REGULATIONS 2009

23No interference with brand

Start here

Get a plain-English read of 23

Turn the raw legal text into a practical explanation grounded in LIVESTOCK REGULATIONS 2009.

Ask Zoe about this section View in full context

23 No interference with brand A person commits an offence if the person removes, defaces, alters or makes illegible a brand on livestock or hides. Fault element: Intention. Maximum penalty: 200 penalty units.

Previous section22Brand to be legible

Next section24No sale or possession if brand removed or defaced

Section 23 - LIVESTOCK REGULATIONS 2009 - No interference with brand | Zoe