Magistrates Court (Food Infringement Notices) Regulation 2005

The regulation revolves around a compact set of legal concepts and administrative mechanics drawn from the Magistrates Court Act 1930, the Food Act 2001 and related legislative instruments.

Infringement notice offence: The regulation applies the Magistrates Court Act 1930, part 3.8 infringement-notice system to particular Food Act offences listed in schedule 1 (s 7). The infringement-notice system provides a non-prosecution, administrative route whereby an alleged contravention can be dealt with by payment of a fixed penalty (see s 3 explanatory note).

Administering authority: The chief health officer is designated as the administering authority for the Food Act infringement regime (s 6). That identification implicates the chief health officer in operational matters described elsewhere in the regulation, including the supply of unique identifying numbers for authorised persons (ss 11 and 12).

Fixed infringement penalties and offence maximums: Schedule 1 presents each listed Food Act provision with two related figures. Column 3 lists the offence penalty in penalty units under the Food Act; column 4 lists the infringement penalty in dollars that an individual must pay under an infringement notice. Section 8(1) makes the schedule 1, column 4 dollar figure the payable amount for an individual; section 8(2) multiplies that amount by five for corporations. The schedule thus distinguishes between court-ordered maximum penalties (penalty units) and the administrative infringement penalty in dollars.

Person-identifying particulars: Section 9 prescribes how the person served must be identified on an infringement notice. The regulation uses direct cross-references to the Food Act for identification methods: notification under Food Act s 90(1) (use the name given), proprietor of a registered food business under s 92(3) (use proprietor name on certificate or registration number), and where the offence involves a food transport vehicle use the vehicle registration number (s 9(a)-(c)). These signpost references mean the Food Act’s definitions and mechanisms for registration and notification feed directly into the infringement-notice identification regime.

Mandatory content for particular offences and companies: Section 10(1) requires that, where the infringement is for an offence against Food Act s 27(1)-(4), the notice must mention each provision of the food standards code contravened. Section 10(2) requires an ACN be included when a company is served. The regulation embeds a substantive link between alleged code breaches and the content of notices.

Authorised person identification and service mechanics: Sections 11 and 12 require that infringement and reminder notices identify the authorised person by full name or surname and initials or by any unique number allocated by the administering authority. Section 14 confirms an authorised officer may serve both infringement and reminder notices. Service of documents is subject to the Legislation Act, pt 19.5, as the regulation notes.

Costs and dispute mechanics: The regulation fixes a $34 cost to serve a reminder notice (s 8(3)) and a $200 cost of beginning a proceeding if liability is disputed (s 13). The regulation thereby puts concrete financial figures on administrative follow-up and litigation initiation.

Dictionary and cross-references: The regulation’s dictionary integrates definitions from the Food Act, the Magistrates Court Act and the Legislation Act. Key terms are signposted: for example, authorised officer and food business are defined in the Food Act dictionary and those definitions apply here (dictionary entries and s 4). The regulation therefore sits within a web of cross-referenced legislative definitions and procedures.

Together, these concepts convert certain Food Act contraventions into an administratively enforcible set of fixed-dollar penalties, administered by the chief health officer through authorised officers, with specified notice content and limited follow-up costs.

This regulation affects four principal groups: food business operators and proprietors, individuals involved in specific Food Act contraventions, corporations that operate in the food sector, and authorised officers and the chief health officer as the administering body.

Food business operators and proprietors: Where a person is the proprietor of a food business registered under the Food Act, section 92(3), an infringement notice must identify the proprietor by the name shown on the certificate of registration or by the registration number (s 9(b)(i)-(ii)). The regime therefore directly targets registered food businesses for the offences listed in schedule 1. Proprietors who have given notice under Food Act s 90(1) (notification of exempt food businesses) are to be identified on notices by the name they supplied (s 9(a)). That mechanism ties enforcement to the Food Act’s registration and notification systems.

Individuals: Section 8(1) sets the infringement penalty for an individual as the amount stated in schedule 1, column 4. The schedule lists dollar amounts, principally $500 and $400 for many items, and smaller amounts ($100) for others. Individuals who are alleged to have committed the offences listed in schedule 1 will therefore face the prescribed fixed-dollar administrative penalty unless they challenge liability.

Corporations: Corporations face a different liability rule. Section 8(2) multiplies the schedule 1, column 4 amount by five for corporations. Section 10(2) requires an infringement notice served on a company to include the company’s Australian Company Number (ACN). This mechanism increases corporate exposure relative to individuals, and produces a uniform multiplier across the listed offences. The page-top republication note that penalty unit values differ for individuals and corporations under the Legislation Act (penalty unit values at the republication date) further highlights the regulatory environment in which corporation-versus-individual liability calculations sit, although s 8(2) sets the corporate infringement amount as a direct multiple of the column 4 dollar amount.

Authorised officers and the chief health officer: The chief health officer is the administering authority (s 6). The administering authority has operational roles, including issuing unique numbers to authorised persons referenced in ss 11 and 12. Section 14 confirms that an authorised officer may serve infringement and reminder notices. Those authorised officers carry the practical burden of correctly identifying persons and offences on notices, including cross-referencing the Food Act registration and notification records (s 9), listing Food Standards Code provisions where required (s 10(1)), and identifying themselves on notices (s 11).

Enforcement and court actors: The Magistrates Court Act 1930, part 3.8 governs the broader infringement-notice process (s 7). If a person disputes liability, section 13 sets the cost of beginning a proceeding at $200. Therefore, the magistrates court and prosecution pathways remain a secondary route for contested matters.

Ancillary affected parties: Providers of administrative services to food businesses, such as compliance consultants and accountants, will be affected because the regime introduces specific administrative steps (registration, notification, ACN inclusion, vehicle registration numbers) that businesses must maintain to avoid technical defects in notices and to ensure that notices are correctly served and addressed.

In short, the regulation primarily affects food businesses and individuals operating in the food sector by prescribing an administrative penalty path, it imposes higher monetary exposure on corporate entities via s 8(2), and it places identification, notice-content and service duties on authorised officers under the chief health officer’s oversight.

The regulation creates defined administrative duties for authorised persons and the chief health officer and prescribes certain entitlements and procedural costs for persons served with infringement or reminder notices. The duties and rights are expressed in statutory obligations about notice content, identification, administration and costs.

Duties of the administering authority: The chief health officer is the administering authority (s 6). That role carries at least two discrete duties under the regulation. First, the administering authority must provide unique identifying numbers for authorised persons where the administering authority chooses to do so, because ss 11 and 12 allow an authorised person to be identified by any unique number given, for this regulation, by the administering authority. Second, the administering authority holds responsibility for overall administration of the infringement scheme for Food Act offences, including oversight of authorised officers. The regulation does not spell out further administrative rulemaking powers here, but the designation in s 6 places practical administrative obligations on the chief health officer.

Duties of authorised officers: An authorised officer may serve infringement notices and reminder notices (s 14). The authorised officer must include specific identifying particulars on an infringement notice: the person served must be identified according to the hierarchy in s 9 (notification name, proprietor name or registration number, or vehicle registration number, as applicable). The authorised person must identify themselves on an infringement notice or reminder notice either by full name or surname and initials, or by the unique number allocated by the administering authority (ss 11 and 12). For offences under Food Act s 27(1)-(4), the authorised officer must list each provision of the food standards code contravened on the infringement notice (s 10(1)). When serving a company, the authorised officer must include the company’s ACN on the notice (s 10(2)). Service itself must be effected in accordance with the Legislation Act pt 19.5 (note in s 14). Those content and identification duties create compliance-checking responsibilities for authorised officers.

Rights and duties of persons served: Individuals and corporations served with an infringement notice have the right to pay the fixed dollar amount set out in schedule 1 column 4 (s 8(1) and s 8(2) for corporations). A person who disputes liability may initiate a proceeding; the regulation fixes the cost of beginning such a proceeding at $200 (s 13), which is an express monetary barrier to litigating the infringement. Additionally, a reminder notice can be served at an administrative cost of $34 (s 8(3)). The regulation does not itself specify internal review or appeal routes beyond the proceeding mechanism referenced in s 13; the Magistrates Court Act 1930, part 3.8 governs the broader process.

Specific procedural rights owed to companies: The regulation requires an ACN on notices served on companies (s 10(2)). Accurate use of the ACN helps ensure procedural regularity and reduces technical grounds for challenge based on identity mistakes.

Record-keeping and registration duties for businesses: Although the regulation does not impose new registration duties directly, it ties notice validity to existing Food Act registration and notification mechanisms. For a proprietor of a registered food business, the infringement notice must use the name on the registration certificate or the registration number (s 9(b)), and for exempt businesses the name given under s 90(1) must be used (s 9(a)). Businesses therefore have a practical duty to maintain accurate registration and notification records to ensure correct identification on any infringement notice.

Cost duties: The regulation imposes fixed administrative costs: $34 for a reminder notice (s 8(3)) and $200 to begin a proceeding if liability is disputed (s 13). Those figures allocate financial burdens for follow-up enforcement and litigation.

In summary, duties fall on the chief health officer to administer and issue unique numbers, on authorised officers to comply with strict notice-content and identification rules, and indirectly on businesses to maintain registrations and notification details. Rights for persons served are limited to the option to pay the fixed infringement amount or to contest liability by commencing proceedings at the prescribed cost.

The regulation defines two parallel penalty regimes and sets out the enforcement steps available to authorised officers.

Infringement penalties: Schedule 1 lists each Food Act offence covered by the infringement scheme and provides two figures. Column 3 shows the maximum offence penalty in penalty units, which is the traditional court-based sanction for the substantive offence. Column 4 sets the infringement notice dollar amount payable by an individual under an infringement notice. Section 8(1) binds the infringement amount to column 4. Where the alleged offender is a corporation, s 8(2) prescribes a corporate infringement penalty equal to five times the amount in column 4. The schedule shows that many covered offences carry an infringement dollar amount of $500, others $400, and some $100 (see schedule 1 items 1-17). Section 8(3) additionally specifies a $34 cost for serving a reminder notice.

Distinction between penalty units and infringement dollars: The schedule’s column 3 figures are expressed in penalty units, which the Legislation Act sets to a dollar value at particular dates; the republication note discloses that at the republication date a penalty unit was $150 for an individual and $750 for a corporation. The regulation, however, does not calculate infringement notice amounts from penalty units. Instead, it fixes flat-dollar infringement amounts in schedule 1 column 4 and applies the corporate multiplier in s 8(2). Practitioners must therefore track both the penalty-unit regime (for court-imposed penalties) and schedule 1’s fixed-dollar infringement amounts (for administrative penalties).

Service and reminder: The authorised officer is the enforcement actor who serves infringement notices and reminder notices (s 14). The content and identity on those notices is tightly prescribed (ss 9-12). If a person does not comply with the infringement notice, the administering process allows for a reminder notice which carries a service cost of $34 (s 8(3)). For contested matters, s 13 fixes the cost of beginning proceedings at $200.

Proceedings and the Magistrates Court Act: Section 7 expressly applies the Magistrates Court Act 1930, part 3.8 to the listed Food Act offences. That part contains the procedural scaffolding for infringement notices including timeframes for payment, withdrawal or withdrawal consequences, and the court process if liability is disputed. The regulation itself does not reprint part 3.8; it anchors its enforcement procedure to the Magistrates Court Act.

Administrative discretion and identification: The power to issue unique numbers and the requirement for authorised person identification on notices (ss 11-12) create an administrative control point. The chief health officer provides unique numbers, and authorised officers may use either their name or the unique number when issuing notices. This method allows for flexible identity verification of authorised officers, although the regulation does not prescribe an evidentiary or audit trail standard for those unique numbers.

Practical enforcement outcomes: The mechanics are designed to facilitate peripheral enforcement actions by shifting many alleged contraventions out of court and into an administrative penalty framework. The fixed-dollar infringement amounts can be collected without litigation, and reminder notices and the proceeding-starting cost structure set predictable follow-up costs. The corporate multiplier in s 8(2) increases the penalty for corporations, while ss 10(1) and 10(2) impose additional notice-content duties in specified contexts.

In short, enforcement under the regulation is executed by authorised officers under the chief health officer’s oversight using fixed-dollar infringement penalties (with a x5 multiplier for corporations), backed by reminder notices and the option of commencing court proceedings at a prescribed cost.

This regulation is tightly cross-referenced to the Magistrates Court Act 1930, the Food Act 2001, the Legislation Act 2001 and, indirectly, the Corporations Act. It does not stand alone; its operation depends on definitions and procedures in those instruments.

Magistrates Court Act 1930: Section 7 of the regulation expressly applies Magistrates Court Act 1930, part 3.8 to the Food Act offences listed in schedule 1. Part 3.8 contains the statutory architecture for issuing, serving and enforcing infringement notices in the ACT. The regulation therefore relies on part 3.8 for procedural aspects not repeated in the instrument, such as payment periods, internal review steps contained in part 3.8, and the court-based processes for disputes. The regulation supplements rather than replaces the Magistrates Court Act procedures by listing the applicable Food Act provisions and specifying notice content and monetary amounts.

Food Act 2001: The regulation’s schedule enumerates specific provisions of the Food Act that are subject to the infringement scheme (schedule 1, column 2). The regulation also utilises the Food Act for definitional references and for identification rules. For example, s 9 requires use of the name given under Food Act s 90(1) if the person has notified under that provision; s 9(b) depends on Food Act s 92(3) for registered food businesses and the certificate of registration; s 10(1) links infringements for Food Act s 27(1)-(4) to specific provisions of the food standards code. The dictionary in the regulation explicitly states that terms such as authorised officer, food business, food standards code, food transport vehicle and proprietor are to be read with the Food Act definitions (dictionary entries and s 4). Thus, the regulatory regime is dependent on the Food Act’s substantive definitions and administrative records.

Legislation Act 2001: The regulation’s republication front matter notes the Legislation Act 2001, s 133 penalty-unit values at the republication date. The regulation also references the Legislation Act for definitions and for document service rules: the note to s 14 directs users to the Legislation Act, pt 19.5 for how documents may be served. The dictionary entry states that the Legislation Act contains definitions and other provisions relevant to this regulation. In short, the Legislation Act supplies both definitional and procedural backstops.

Corporations Act: Section 10(3) defines 'company' as a company registered under the Corporations Act, and s 10(2) requires that an infringement notice served on a company include its ACN. That cross-reference means corporate identity and registry information maintained under the Corporations Act are incorporated into notice content and procedural regularity.

Food Standards Code: Section 10(1) obliges that where the infringement is for a Food Act s 27(1)-(4) offence, the infringement notice must mention each provision of the food standards code contravened. The food standards code itself is a separate instrument, and this regulation requires an explicit mapping from an alleged Food Act breach to the particular food standards code provisions.

Service rules under other Acts: The regulation points to the Legislation Act pt 19.5 for service methods (s 14 note). The administering authority’s issuance of unique numbers interacts with administrative records and standards under the Health/Chief Health Officer portfolio as defined in the Legislation Act and the administrative instruments of the ACT health apparatus.

Penalty-unit mechanics and courts: The schedule juxtaposes penalty-unit maxima and fixed-dollar infringement amounts. For magistrates and litigators, this means two separate numeric regimes apply depending on the enforcement path chosen: court-ordered penalties based on penalty units and administrative infringement dollar amounts as fixed in schedule 1 column 4. The republication note on penalty-unit values is informative about conversion at a particular point in time but does not alter the schedule’s fixed infringement dollar figures.

Collectively, the regulation is interdependent with its parent and referenced Acts. It imports definitions and record-keeping systems from the Food Act and the Corporations Act, relies on the Magistrates Court Act for enforcement procedures, and uses the Legislation Act for definitions, service mechanics and context for penalty-unit values. Practitioners must therefore navigate a web of cross-references to ensure proper service, identification, and enforcement outcomes.

The republished regulation includes an annotated amendment history in its endnotes. The legislative timeline shows initial notification and several amending Acts that adjusted items and commencement dates. The principal steps in the instrument’s statutory history, as recorded in the republished law, are as follows.

Initial notification and commencement: The Magistrates Court (Food Infringement Notices) Regulation 2005 (SL2005-30) was notified LR on 10 November 2005. Sections 1 and 2 commenced on 10 November 2005, and the remainder of the regulation commenced on 12 November 2005 (Legislation Act s 75(1) and statutory commencement references in endnote 3).

Justice and Community Safety Legislation Amendment Act 2008: The regulation was amended by the Justice and Community Safety Legislation Amendment Act 2008 (A2008-7), schedule 1 part 1.14. The instrument was notified LR on 16 April 2008, with parts commencing on 7 May 2008 as recorded in the legislation history.

Food (Nutritional Information) Amendment Act 2011: The regulation was further amended by the Food (Nutritional Information) Amendment Act 2011 (A2011-32), notified LR on 5 September 2011. Schedule 1 under that Act commenced on 1 January 2013.

Food Amendment Act 2012: Amendments by the Food Amendment Act 2012 (A2012-4), schedule 2 part 2.2, are recorded. That Act was notified LR on 1 March 2012, with schedule 2 part 2.2 commencing 2 March 2012.

Statute Law Amendment Act 2015: The Statute Law Amendment Act 2015 (A2015-15), schedule 3 part 3.24, amended the regulation and was notified LR on 27 May 2015, with schedule 3 part 3.24 commencing 10 June 2015.

Editorial and detailed amendment notes: The republication endnote 4 records specific amendment notations. Section 2 was omitted by the Legislation Act s 89(4) amendment notation. Section 14 (authorised people for infringement notice offences) was amended by A2015-15 amendments 3.102 and 3.103. Section 15 (expiry) was omitted by A2008-7 amendment 1.64. Schedule 1 entries were amended by A2012-4 and renumbered in republications R3 and R4; subsequent amendments by A2011-32 are noted. Endnote 5 lists earlier republications and their effective dates, indicating republications R1 through R4 and their effective ranges.

Practical effect of amendments: The recorded amendments adjust operational details such as the list of offences in schedule 1, the identity of authorised persons, expiry mechanics, and the administrative details recorded in the instrument. The amendment history shows the regulation has been revised several times alongside broader Food Act and justice legislation changes, particularly in 2008 through 2015. Each amendment and its commencement date are recorded in the legislation history and amendment history endnotes.

For practitioners, the amendment history signals that schedule 1 entries have been subject to renumbering and modification, so reliance on schedule item numbers without cross-checking current text may be risky. The endnotes identify the exact amending Acts and schedules, enabling verification of the legislative changes and their commencement dates.

The republished regulation does not supply case law or judicial interpretations. The instrument’s endnotes and body do not name any judicial decisions or litigation outcomes arising under the regulation. The regulation is primarily administrative and therefore much enforcement may be resolved by payment of infringement notices or by magistrates court proceedings under the Magistrates Court Act 1930 where liability is disputed. The republished law’s endnotes set out commencement and amendment history but do not include litigation annotations.

Absent recorded judicial decisions in the republished instrument, there are several implications for practitioners considering litigation risk and likely judicial treatment.

Scope for judicial clarification: Because the regulation prescribes notice content, identification requirements and fixed-dollar penalties, disputes that proceed to court under the Magistrates Court Act part 3.8 could raise questions about compliance with the notice formalities in ss 9-12, the sufficiency of listing food standards code provisions under s 10(1), and the correct application of the corporate multiplier in s 8(2). Those issues would likely be determined by magistrates and, on appeal, higher courts. The regulation’s silence on litigation history simply means that any body of case law would need to be gathered from court databases and reported decisions rather than from the instrument itself.

Reliance on primary Acts: Where disputes involve interpretation of the Food Act provisions enumerated in schedule 1, courts will necessarily consider the substantive Food Act provisions as well as this regulation’s mechanics. The regulation’s references to definitions in the Food Act and the Legislation Act suggest that any litigation will be interpretive of multiple Acts. The regulation does not itself provide interpretive guidance beyond its text.

Practical note on research: For an up-to-date litigation history, practitioners should query ACT Magistrates Court decisions and any appellate reports involving infringement notices under the Food Act. The republished regulation provides the legislative framework and the list of affected Food Act sections; case law will be external to this instrument and must be located by searching court databases and legal reporting services.

In sum, the republished text contains no litigation annotations. Any judicial development in relation to enforcement, notice sufficiency, identity errors, the corporate multiplier or interactions with the Food Standards Code must be identified by independent case law research beyond this regulation.

This section flags technical traps and practical pitfalls grounded in the regulation’s text.

Mismatch between penalty units and infringement dollar amounts: Schedule 1 presents each offence with a penalty expressed in penalty units (column 3) and an infringement penalty in dollars (column 4). The regulation fixes the infringement-notice amount in dollars via s 8(1) and applies a fivefold multiplier for corporations via s 8(2). It does not require conversion of penalty units into dollars for infringement notices. Practitioners may be tempted to equate penalty-unit maxima with the infringement amount, but the regulation separates the two figures. The republication note concerning penalty-unit values under the Legislation Act should not be used to change the schedule’s fixed-dollar infringement amounts.

Corporate multiplier may surprise recipients: Section 8(2) makes corporate infringement penalties five times the individual figure in column 4. Schedule 1 lists many individual infringement amounts at $500; for a company the payable amount would therefore be $2,500. That automatic multiplier is mechanical; it applies regardless of whether the statutory penalty-unit regime would otherwise produce a different corporate outcome. Corporations should be aware that administrative exposure is amplified relative to natural persons.

Rigidity of notice identification requirements: Section 9 prescribes a narrow list of ways to identify the person served: notification name under Food Act s 90(1), proprietor name or registration number under s 92(3) or vehicle registration number where a food transport vehicle is involved. If an authorised officer uses a different identifier or an incorrect registration number or ACN, affected persons may have grounds to challenge notice validity. The regulation does not offer alternate fall-back identification methods on the face of s 9.

Obligation to list food standards code provisions for s 27 offences: Section 10(1) requires that infringement notices for offences under Food Act s 27(1)-(4) mention each provision of the food standards code contravened. That is a detailed content obligation. Failure to specify the particular code clauses may be a procedural defect and could give rise to disputes about the notice’s adequacy.

Unique number reliance for authorised persons: Sections 11 and 12 allow authorised persons to be identified either by name or by a unique number provided by the administering authority. If the administering authority (chief health officer per s 6) issues unique numbers, record-keeping must ensure the unique number can be traced back to an individual officer. Absent such traces, a person served may challenge the authorised person’s status or the authenticity of the notice.

Reminder and proceeding costs are fixed and non-trivial relative to some offences: The $34 reminder cost (s 8(3)) and $200 cost for beginning a proceeding if liability is disputed (s 13) are fixed administrative figures. For low-value infringement amounts (for example, $100 items in schedule 1), a person may need to weigh the economics of disputing liability, noting the $200 proceeding cost.

Service rules default to Legislation Act: Section 14’s note indicates how documents may be served is governed by the Legislation Act pt 19.5. Practitioners must check and follow those service rules precisely; failing to serve a notice according to the Legislation Act could render subsequent enforcement steps procedurally defective.

Scope limited to listed Food Act provisions: Section 7 applies part 3.8 to offences against provisions of the Food Act listed in schedule 1. Offences not listed in schedule 1 remain outside this infringement-notice regime, meaning prosecution in court may still be necessary for unlisted offences. It is easy to assume all Food Act offences are within the infringement regime; they are not.

ACN requirement for companies: Section 10(2) requires inclusion of the ACN on infringement notices served on companies. An authorised officer’s failure to include the ACN could be a technical defect. Companies must ensure their ACN is readily available to authorised officers for notice accuracy.

Potential for administrative bottlenecks: The chief health officer is the administering authority for the entire infringement-notice scheme for Food Act offences (s 6). If the office does not have sufficient resourcing or record systems to allocate unique numbers and to manage authorisations for officers, practical enforcement may be delayed or risk procedural errors.

Record-of-registration dependence: Because s 9(b) ties identification to the certificate of registration or registration number, businesses that fail to update registration certificates, or whose certificate details diverge from operational names, increase the risk of notice-defects. Keeping registration records current is a simple compliance measure but a possible source of later dispute if ignored.

In short, technical compliance with identification and content requirements, awareness of the corporate multiplier, and careful attention to service rules and costs are the main gotchas that emerge directly from the regulation’s text.

This section sets out practical, source-grounded steps for compliance by businesses, authorised officers and the administering authority, based on the regulation’s requirements.

For proprietors and food businesses

• Maintain accurate registration details. Ensure the name of the proprietor and the registration number shown on the certificate of registration under Food Act s 92(3) are current and readily accessible, because s 9(b) requires infringement notices to use the registration certificate name or number.

• Maintain notification records for exempt food businesses. If relying on Food Act s 90(1) notification as an exempt business, keep the exact name supplied under that notification, since s 9(a) requires using that name on any infringement notice.

• Keep ACN and corporate details current. For corporate entities, ensure the Australian Company Number is up to date and available, because s 10(2) requires the ACN to be included on an infringement notice served on a company.

• Display and keep vehicle registration information accurate for food transport vehicles. Where offences involve a food transport vehicle, s 9(c) requires the vehicle registration number to be used on notices.

• Document compliance with applicable food standards provisions. For activities that could implicate Food Act s 27(1)-(4), maintain records showing compliance with relevant food standards code provisions so any allegation requiring listing of each food standards code provision (s 10(1)) can be rebutted or addressed quickly.

• Budget for potential infringements and reminder costs. Note that many infringements in schedule 1 set an individual infringement amount at $500 or $400, and that a reminder notice costs $34 (s 8(3)). For companies, remember the fivefold multiplier in s 8(2).

For authorised officers and the administering authority

• Secure and record unique numbers for authorised persons. The administering authority (chief health officer per s 6) should set up an auditable process for allocating unique numbers to authorised officers, so that notices that use unique numbers can be traced to a specific authorised person in accordance with ss 11 and 12.

• Ensure notices meet the content requirements. When serving an infringement notice, authorised officers must identify the person served according to s 9, include required particulars for s 27 offences (s 10(1)), and include a company’s ACN where applicable (s 10(2)). Use of full names or assigned unique numbers is required for the authorised person’s identification (ss 11-12).

• Follow service procedures under the Legislation Act. Section 14 refers to the Legislation Act pt 19.5 for document service. Authorised officers must follow the document-service rules set out in that Act to avoid procedural defects.

• Keep administration records and proof of service. Maintain contemporaneous records of service, including copies of infringement and reminder notices, the method of service used and any registration or notification details used to identify the person. These records will be vital if liability is disputed and a proceeding begins.

• Train officers on how to identify contraventions and list food standards provisions. Where s 10(1) applies, officers must specify each food standards code provision contravened. Training and reference materials will reduce risk of errors.

For persons served with an infringement notice

• Check the notice for the mandatory particulars. Verify that the notice identifies you in the manner required by s 9, that the authorised person is identified per ss 11-12, and that, where relevant, each contravened food standards code provision is listed per s 10(1). If a company, check the ACN is present (s 10(2)).

• Assess the cost-benefit of dispute. If you dispute liability, the cost of beginning a proceeding is $200 (s 13). Compare this $200 cost and likely legal fees with the infringement amount and practical considerations such as reputational risk and the strength of available evidence.

• Consider prompt payment to avoid a reminder cost. The reminder notice carries a $34 service cost (s 8(3)). Payment of the infringement amount will generally avoid reminder costs and further administrative steps.

Operational compliance checklist for regulators and advisers

• Confirm which Food Act provisions are subject to the infringement regime by consulting schedule 1. Only the listed Food Act provisions are covered by the regulation (s 7). If an alleged contravention is outside schedule 1, prosecution under the Food Act may be the only enforcement route.

• Maintain a system to cross-reference Food Act registrations and notifications. Because identification on notices depends on Food Act records (s 9), set up searchable databases for registration certificates and notification names.

• Keep a log of issued unique numbers and authorised officers. The chief health officer should ensure unique numbers are allocated and recorded securely to support traceability and audit.

• Update staff on amendment history. The regulation has been amended several times (see endnotes). Ensure enforcement staff access the current version of the regulation and its schedule, as items have been renumbered and amended.

• Integrate infringement-penalty accounting into enforcement systems. The fixed-dollar amounts in schedule 1 column 4 are the operative infringement penalties for individuals (s 8(1)) and should be used in billing and collection systems, with the fivefold corporate multiplier applied where the recipient is a company (s 8(2)).

In summary, compliance requires accurate records (registration, notification, ACN, vehicle registration), careful drafting of notices to meet ss 9-12 and s 10(1), adherence to service rules in the Legislation Act, and administrative processes for unique-number allocation and audit under the chief health officer. The regulation’s fixed-dollar figures for infringements, reminder notices and proceeding-starting costs give concrete numbers to rely upon when designing accounting and compliance workflows.