Magistrates Court (Nature Conservation Infringement Notices) Regulation 2015

Infringement notice offence. This is an offence against a provision of the Nature Conservation Act that is listed in schedule 1, column 2. For such an offence, a conservation officer may issue an infringement notice under part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act instead of prosecuting. The notice itself is a statutory document that must contain the information required by sections 9 and 10 of this regulation and by section 121(1)(c) of the Magistrates Court Act. An infringement notice offence is not a separate category of offence; it is simply an existing offence that the executive has chosen to make eligible for the infringement notice process.

Infringement notice penalty. This is the dollar amount listed in schedule 1, column 4, which varies by offence. For an individual, that is the full amount payable. For a corporation, the penalty is five times that amount (section 8(2)). The penalty is fixed by the regulation and is not subject to judicial discretion if the recipient pays within the time allowed. The amount is separate from the maximum court penalty (column 3, expressed in penalty units) which applies only if the matter proceeds to court and the person is convicted. The infringement penalty is a discount from the maximum in most cases, providing an incentive for early resolution. The value of a penalty unit at the republication date is $160 for an individual and $810 for a corporation, but the infringement penalty is set in dollars directly, not as a multiple of penalty units.

Administering authority. Section 6 designates the conservator of flora and fauna as the administering authority for infringement notice offences under the Nature Conservation Act. The conservator has responsibility for overseeing the system, including assigning unique identification numbers to authorised persons who issue notices (section 9(b) and section 11(b)). The conservator is defined by reference to the Legislation Act dictionary, which in turn refers to the Nature Conservation Act.

Authorised person. The term is defined in the Magistrates Court Act dictionary and is imported by note 3 to the dictionary of this regulation. An authorised person is someone appointed or authorised to issue infringement notices under the relevant legislation. For this regulation, section 12 restricts the class of authorised persons to conservation officers only. A conservation officer is defined in the Nature Conservation Act dictionary and includes persons appointed under that Act. The practical effect is that only officers with conservation expertise (or at least designated as such) may issue notices, not general police or rangers from other agencies.

Conservation officer. Cross referenced to the Nature Conservation Act dictionary. Typically includes officers appointed under that Act who have powers to enforce conservation laws. Because section 12 limits the service of notices to conservation officers, it may restrict the number of personnel who can issue tickets, potentially reducing the volume of enforcement compared to a broader authorisation.

Reminder notice. A notice served after the initial infringement notice if the penalty is not paid within the required period. Section 8(3) sets the cost of serving a reminder notice at $34, which may be added to the penalty. The reminder notice must identify the authorised person in the same manner as the original notice (section 11). This is a secondary step before the matter may be referred for prosecution or enforcement action.

Part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act. This is the parent framework that governs infringement notices generally in the ACT. It sets out the process for issuing notices, the consequences of paying or not paying, and the rights of the recipient. This regulation plugs into that framework by specifying which offences and penalties apply for nature conservation matters. Without this regulation, part 3.8 could not be used for Nature Conservation Act offences.

Corporate multiplier. Section 8(2) imposes a multiplier of five times the individual infringement penalty on corporations. This is a common feature in infringement notice schemes, reflecting the assumption that corporations have deeper pockets and should face proportionally higher penalties. However, it can create a significant financial burden for small businesses or incorporated societies that may not have large revenues.

The regulation directly affects three categories of persons: alleged offenders (individuals and corporations who may commit the listed offences), the authorised enforcement officers (conservation officers), and the administering authority (the conservator of flora and fauna). Indirectly, it affects the broader public and business community operating in or near protected areas or engaging in activities regulated by the Nature Conservation Act.

For individuals, the regulation means that certain conduct - such as entering a restricted area, taking a protected plant, disturbing a protected animal, or failing to comply with a licence condition - can result in a fixed penalty of between $30 and $1,500, depending on the specific offence. An individual who receives a notice must decide whether to pay the penalty (and accept the financial loss but avoid a criminal record) or elect to have the matter dealt with by a court, where the maximum penalty is higher and conviction carries a criminal record. The regulation thus imposes a financial risk on ordinary people who engage in outdoor recreation, gardening, building, or other activities that may unintentionally or intentionally breach conservation laws.

For corporations, the stakes are much higher. A corporation pays five times the individual infringement penalty. For the most serious listed offences (such as taking a protected native animal without a licence under section 217(1) or damaging native vegetation under section 222(1)), the corporation penalty is $7,500 per notice. This affects businesses involved in construction, land development, agriculture, tourism, and any commercial activity that interacts with the natural environment. The multiplier increases the compliance burden and risk exposure for incorporated entities. A single incident could generate multiple notices if several distinct offences are involved.

Conservation officers are directly empowered by section 12. They become the gatekeepers of the infringement notice system. The quality and consistency of enforcement will depend on their training and discretion. Because they are the only persons who may serve notices, any administrative delays or errors in issuing notices will affect the functioning of the entire scheme. Officers must also comply with the content requirements of sections 9 and 10, including properly identifying themselves and including the company ACN for corporate recipients. Failure to do so may invalidate a notice.

The conservator of flora and fauna as administering authority must manage the system: assign unique numbers to officers, oversee compliance with notice requirements, and handle the proceeds of penalties. The conservator also has the power to refer unpaid notices for prosecution. The regulation creates an administrative workload for the conservator’s office, which must balance enforcement efficiency with procedural fairness.

Legal practitioners advising clients on nature conservation compliance must be aware that infringement notices are now a possible outcome for the schedule 1 offences. A client who is unsure about guilt or wants to avoid a criminal record may be advised to pay the penalty, but that may not be the right course if the client has a defence or if the notice is defective. The regulation introduces a practical decision point that did not exist before for many of these offences.

Recreational users of public land - hikers, campers, fishers, four wheel drivers - may be the most frequent recipients of notices for offences such as entering a prohibited area (section 295(1), $30) or using a vehicle off road (section 306(2), $600). The low penalty for some items suggests these are intended to deal with minor infractions without court involvement, but the cumulative effect of multiple notices could be significant.

Environmental consultants and landholders must be aware that activities like removing native vegetation (section 222) or interfering with a waterway (section 213) can attract infringement penalties of $600 for individuals and $3,000 for corporations. The regulation does not provide any new defences; it merely provides a settlement mechanism.

Duty of the recipient to pay or elect. The primary duty imposed by the regulation is on the person served with an infringement notice: they must either pay the prescribed penalty within the time stated in the notice (usually 28 days under part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act) or elect to have the matter dealt with by a court. Failure to do either may result in enforcement action (registration of the debt or prosecution). This duty arises even if the recipient believes the notice is incorrect; the right to contest is preserved, but the recipient must take positive action to exercise it.

Right to contest the offence in court. The infringement notice system is expressly stated by section 5 note as an alternative to prosecution. A recipient who does not wish to pay the penalty can elect to have the matter heard in the Magistrates Court. In that event, the ordinary criminal process applies: the conservation officer must prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt, and the maximum penalty is the higher penalty unit amount in schedule 1, column 3. This right is fundamental but carries risk: if the court convicts, the fine could be higher than the infringement penalty, and the person may also incur court costs and a criminal record.

Right to be informed of the enforcer’s identity. Sections 9 and 11 give recipients the right to know who issued the notice. The notice must identify the authorised person by full name, surname and initials, or a unique number assigned by the administering authority. This allows the recipient to verify that the person had authority to issue the notice. If the identification is missing or defective, the notice may be invalid, providing a ground to challenge any subsequent enforcement. For companies, the notice must also include the company’s ACN under section 10(1), which helps ensure the corporate entity is correctly identified.

Duty to include the ACN on corporate notices. For conservation officers, there is a specific duty under section 10(1) to include the company’s ACN on any infringement notice served on a company. This is an additional requirement beyond what the Magistrates Court Act itself requires (section 121(1)(c)). Failure to include the ACN might render the notice invalid or at least defective, potentially allowing the company to have the notice set aside. Officers must therefore take care to identify the corporate recipient correctly.

Duty to pay reminder notice cost. Section 8(3) sets a fixed cost of $34 for serving a reminder notice. If an initial notice is not paid, a reminder notice may be served, and that cost is added to the amount owed. The recipient has a duty to pay the additional cost if they ultimately pay the penalty. This cost is not subject to judicial discretion and is payable as a debt.

No duty to cooperate beyond the notice. The regulation does not impose any duty on the recipient to provide further information or to assist in the enforcement process. The infringement notice is a self contained demand; the recipient may simply pay or elect without explaining their decision.

Rights of the administering authority. The conservator has the right to assign unique identification numbers to officers (sections 9(b) and 11(b)) and presumably has the right to withdraw that authorisation if an officer acts improperly. The conservator also has the right to receive payment of penalties and the $34 reminder notice cost, and to take further enforcement action if the penalty is not paid.

The regulation sets two tiers of financial consequences: the infringement penalty itself and the possibility of higher penalties upon prosecution. It also prescribes a fixed cost for reminder notices.

Infringement penalties are the dollar amounts in schedule 1, column 4. They range from $30 (item 40, section 295(1) - likely an offence such as failing to comply with a sign) to $1,500 (many items, including serious offences like taking a protected animal without authorisation under section 135(1)). These amounts are fixed and do not vary according to the circumstances of the offence or the means of the offender. A conservation officer has no discretion to lower the amount; it is a take it or leave it figure.

Corporate multiplier. Section 8(2) provides that a corporation must pay five times the amount in column 4. For a $1,500 offence, that is $7,500. The multiplier does not apply to individuals. There is no definition of “corporation” in this regulation beyond the cross reference to the Legislation Act dictionary, which imports the Corporations Act definition. Unincorporated associations and partnerships may not be caught, but incorporated entities are. Small proprietary companies with limited resources could face a significant penalty for a single incident.

Penalty units value. While not part of the regulation itself, note that at the republication date the value of a penalty unit for an offence is $160 for an individual and $810 for a corporation (see Legislation Act, section 133). The infringement penalties are set in dollar terms, not as multiples of penalty units, so they do not automatically increase when the penalty unit value rises. However, the offence penalty (column 3) is in penalty units, so if the matter goes to court the maximum fine adjusts with any changes to unit value.

Cost of reminder notice. Section 8(3) sets a fixed $34 cost for serving a reminder notice. This is modest but can be added to the penalty if the initial notice is not paid. There is no provision for this cost to be waived or reduced. It functions as a late fee to encourage prompt payment.

Enforcement if penalty not paid. The regulation does not itself lay out enforcement steps; it relies on part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act. Generally, if the infringement penalty is not paid and the recipient does not elect to have the matter heard, the penalty may be registered as a debt enforceable as a civil judgment, or the matter may be referred for prosecution. If prosecuted, the court can impose the full penalty unit amount (column 3) and may also order costs. For an individual, a $1,500 infringement penalty is much lower than a potential court fine of 50 penalty units ($8,000). That differential creates a strong incentive for recipients to pay rather than contest.

No criminal record for payment. An important feature of infringement notices is that paying the penalty does not result in a criminal conviction. This is a significant benefit for individuals and corporations, especially where the underlying conduct might carry reputational damage or licensing consequences. However, the payment is effectively an admission of guilt for civil debt purposes, and it may be admissible in other contexts (e.g., professional misconduct proceedings) even if not a conviction.

No provision for waiver or appeal within the regulation. There is no mechanism in this regulation to seek a reduction of the infringement penalty on grounds of financial hardship, mistake, or exceptional circumstances. The only option is to elect court hearing, which carries the risk of a higher penalty. This creates a dilemma for a person who believes they are innocent but cannot afford the risk of a larger fine.

Magistrates Court Act 1930, part 3.8. This regulation is made under and operates within part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act. Part 3.8 provides the general framework for infringement notices: how they are served, the period for payment, the effect of payment, the right to elect court hearing, and the consequences of non payment. The regulation adds the specific list of offences and penalties and the identity requirements. Any inconsistency with part 3.8 would be resolved by the provisions of the Act prevailing. The regulation also incorporates definitions from the Magistrates Court Act (see dictionary note 3) including “administering authority”, “authorised person”, “infringement notice”, and “reminder notice”.

Nature Conservation Act 2014. This is the primary Act whose offences are the subject of the regulation. The regulation does not amend or modify the underlying offences; it only provides an alternative penalty and process. The elements of the offence, the fault elements, the available defences (such as licences or exemptions) all remain as set out in the Nature Conservation Act. Schedule 1 lists specific sections of that Act, including sections 135(1) (taking protected native animal), 138(1) (taking protected native plant), 149(1) and (2) (damaging habitat), 222(1) to (4) (clearing native vegetation), and 295(1) (failing to comply with sign). Practitioners must consult both the Nature Conservation Act and this regulation to understand the full picture.

Legislation Act 2001. Several provisions of the Legislation Act are relevant: section 133 (value of penalty units), section 155 and 156 (definitions apply across the entire regulation unless otherwise provided), and the dictionary provisions. The regulation’s dictionary relies on the Legislation Act for definitions of “conservator of flora and fauna”, “corporation”, “Corporations Act”, and “individual”. The note in the regulation about the legal status of notes refers to section 127 of the Legislation Act.

Criminal Code 2002 (ACT). The offences in the Nature Conservation Act are subject to the Criminal Code unless expressly excluded. The infringement notice process does not alter the fault elements for the offences; it merely provides an administrative resolution. If a matter proceeds to court after election, the Criminal Code applies in full.

Other ACT infringement notice regulations. The ACT has separate regulations for infringement notices under other Acts (e.g., road transport, environment protection, public health). Each regulation operates independently, specifying its own list of offences, penalties, and authorised persons. This regulation is specific to the Nature Conservation Act. There is no general cross referencing, but the procedural framework under part 3.8 is uniform.

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Section 10(2) defines “company” by reference to the Corporations Act. Only companies registered under that Act need to have their ACN included on the notice. Other incorporated entities (e.g., associations incorporated under state laws) may not be “companies” for this purpose, but they are still corporations for the multiplier provision because the dictionary uses the Legislation Act definition of “corporation” which is broader.

Common law and human rights. The infringement notice system must comply with the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT). The right to a fair hearing is preserved by the option to elect court hearing. However, the system may be criticised for creating a financial incentive to plead guilty, which could pressure innocent people into paying to avoid the risk of larger penalties.

The regulation was originally made as SL2015-20 and notified on the ACT legislation register on 10 June 2015. Sections 1 and 2 commenced on that date; the remainder commenced on 11 June 2015, the same day as the commencement of the Nature Conservation Act 2014 (A2014-59). The regulation therefore came into force in tandem with the principal Act it supports.

The only substantive amendment to date was made by the Nature Conservation Amendment Act 2023 (A2023-56). That Act was notified on 11 December 2023, but schedule 1 of the amending Act did not commence until 29 March 2024 (see section 2 of that Act as modified by commencement notice CN2024-2). The amendment affected schedule 1 of this regulation. According to the amendment history in endnote 4, schedule 1 was amended by amendment 1.1 of A2023-56, and the items were subsequently renumbered by republication R2 under the Legislation Act.

We do not have the text of the amending Act, but it is common for such amendments to add or remove offences from the infringement notice schedule, or to adjust penalty amounts. The fact that items were renumbered suggests that some items were inserted or deleted, requiring a renumbering of the remaining items. Practitioners must ensure they are using the latest republication (R2, effective 29 March 2024) and should not rely on earlier versions of schedule 1.

The regulation also had its commencement section 2 omitted by the Legislation Act editorial process (see endnote 4). This is a formal change typical of republications: the commencement provision is no longer relevant and is removed by the Parliamentary Counsel under the editorial powers.

There have been two republications: R1 on 11 June 2015 (original) and R2 on 29 March 2024 (current). No other amendments have been made. The regulation has remained stable for nearly nine years, suggesting that the list of offences and penalties has been reasonably settled. However, the 2024 amendment indicates that the government may adjust the schedule periodically to reflect new offences in the Nature Conservation Act or to recalibrate penalties.

The regulation itself is a procedural instrument and is unlikely to be the subject of direct litigation. Most challenges would arise in the context of the underlying offence or the validity of an infringement notice. There is no reported case law specifically on this regulation that is cited in the source. However, some considerations are relevant.

Because the regulation merely incorporates by reference the offences in schedule 1, any challenge to the constitutional validity of the infringement notice system under part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act would affect this regulation. But such challenges have been largely settled in other Australian jurisdictions, and the ACT scheme follows standard models.

Potential grounds for litigation include:

• Whether a person served with an infringement notice properly qualified as a “conservation officer” under the Nature Conservation Act. If the officer lacked the necessary delegation, the notice may be invalid. Section 12 gives that power only to conservation officers.
• Whether the notice complied with the content requirements of sections 9 and 10. Missing information, such as the authorised person’s name or the company’s ACN, could be used to resist payment or enforcement.
• Whether the penalty amount was correctly applied. For instance, if the recipient is not a corporation but was wrongly charged the corporate multiplier, that would be a challenge under section 8(2).
• Whether the underlying conduct actually falls within the description of the charged offence. Since the infringement notice typically only states the provision number (e.g., section 222(1)), a recipient may need to examine the Nature Conservation Act to determine if the facts match the legal elements.

Because the infringement notice is an alternative to prosecution, a recipient who elects court hearing can raise any defence available under the Nature Conservation Act. The regulation does not limit those defences.

There is also the possibility of civil proceedings against the conservator for administrative law remedies (e.g., judicial review of the decision to issue a notice) or for tort (e.g., malicious prosecution if the notice was issued without reasonable cause). However, the regulatory scheme generally protects officers acting in good faith.

The relatively small amounts involved in infringement notices mean that litigation is often not economically rational unless a principle is at stake or the corporate multiplier is high. Many recipients will simply pay. Therefore, the litigation history is likely sparse.

Corporate multiplier traps. A business incorporated as a company receives a penalty five times the individual amount, even if it is a one person company with minimal revenue. The regulation does not distinguish between a multinational corporation and a small incorporated family farm. There is no discretion to reduce the multiplier. An individual who operates as a sole trader pays the individual penalty; incorporation increases the financial risk.

No waiver for minor offences. The lowest penalty in schedule 1 is $30 for failing to comply with a sign (section 295(1)). Even $30 is a fixed penalty with no ability to receive a warning. The regulation does not give the conservation officer discretion to issue a verbal warning instead of a notice for trivial matters. This could lead to ticketing for truly minor technical breaches that a reasonable person would consider harmless.

Reminder notice cost added automatically. If a recipient misplaces the notice or pays late, the $34 reminder notice cost is triggered. There is no grace period or waiver for first time offenders. The cost is modest but adds to the burden.

Only conservation officers can issue notices. This is a narrow class. If a conservation officer is not present at the scene, a police officer or ranger from another agency cannot issue a notice for these offences. This limits the enforcement reach. However, it also means that recipients have a higher assurance that the issuer has specialised knowledge of conservation law. The gotcha is for the enforcee: if you receive a notice from someone who is not a conservation officer, the notice may be invalid, and you should seek legal advice before paying.

Company ACN requirement is mandatory. Section 10(1) requires that an infringement notice served on a company must include the company’s ACN. If it is missing, the notice is likely invalid. A company receiving a notice without its ACN may ignore it or challenge enforcement. But a company that pays such a defective notice may be deemed to have waived the defect, so it is important to check.

The schedule may not cover all offences. Many Nature Conservation Act offences are not listed (e.g., more serious offences such as trafficking in threatened species, which may carry criminal penalties only). This regulation only applies to the 51 provisions in schedule 1. If a person commits an unlisted offence, they cannot receive an infringement notice; they must be prosecuted. Practitioners should confirm whether the alleged conduct is actually listed before advising on the infringement notice option.

No express power to withdraw a notice. If a person pays a notice but later believes they were not guilty, there is no mechanism in this regulation to seek a refund or reversal. The payment is final. This contrasts with some other jurisdictions where a person can elect court hearing even after paying under protest.

The $30 penalty for sign non compliance is a fixed amount that will not increase with inflation. Unlike penalty units, which are periodically adjusted, the dollar amounts in column 4 are set numbers. Over time, their real value erodes. This may reduce the deterrent effect for minor offences but also means a recipient will not face unexpected increases.

Interplay with licence conditions. Some of the listed offences (e.g., sections 257 or 258) relate to failure to comply with licence conditions or directions of a conservation officer. A person with a licence may receive an infringement notice for failing to adhere to a condition, even if the failure was unintentional. The notice provides no opportunity to explain before the penalty is due.

Potential for multiple notices. A single incident could involve multiple offences, each carrying its own infringement penalty. For example, if a person clears vegetation (section 222(1)), damages habitat (section 149(2)), and takes a protected plant (section 138(1)), they could receive three separate notices totalling up to $3,750 as an individual or $18,750 as a corporation. There is no aggregation limit in the regulation.

Know the schedule. The first step for any person or business whose activities intersect with the Nature Conservation Act is to be familiar with the 51 offence provisions listed in schedule 1. These are the only provisions for which infringement notices may be issued. A compliance manual should identify which activities trigger these offences and the applicable penalty amounts.

Obtain necessary licences or permits. Many of the listed offences (e.g., taking protected animals under section 135(1), taking protected plants under section 138(1)) are strict liability offences that are only lawful if done under a licence or other authorisation under the Nature Conservation Act. The surest way to avoid an infringement notice is to ensure that any potentially regulated activity is covered by a valid permit. Keep copies of licences on site and on person when in the field.

Pay promptly if you receive a notice. If you receive an infringement notice and believe you are guilty, or if the cost of contesting outweighs the penalty, the simplest compliance step is to pay the amount within the time stated on the notice (usually 28 days). Do not ignore the notice: a reminder notice will follow with an additional $34 cost, and ultimately the matter could go to court or be registered as a debt. Payment should be made to the address or account specified on the notice. Keep a record of payment.

Check the notice for defects. Before paying, verify that the notice identifies the authorised person correctly under section 9 (full name, surname and initials, or unique number). If you are a company, confirm the notice includes your ACN as required by section 10. If the notice fails these requirements, it may be invalid. Seek legal advice before either paying or ignoring a defective notice. A defective notice may still be enforceable if you do not challenge it in time.

Election to contest. If you believe the notice is wrong or if the penalty is too high relative to the facts, you have the right to elect to have the matter heard in the Magistrates Court. This must be done in writing within the time period specified on the notice (part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act will govern the exact procedure). Be aware that if you lose in court, the fine can be up to the penalty unit amount in schedule 1, column 3, which is higher than the infringement penalty. Also, a conviction will appear on your criminal record.

For corporations: ensure correct entity details. If you are a company, ensure that any conservation officer dealing with you has your correct ACN. Include it on any documentation you carry to avoid misidentification. If you receive a notice without the ACN, you may have grounds to challenge, but you should not simply disregard it without legal advice.

Maintain good records. Keep records of licences, permits, and interactions with conservation officers. If you are served with an infringement notice, note the time, date, location, and the identity of the officer. Photographs or witness statements may help if you later contest.

Review insurance coverage. For businesses, consider whether insurance covers infringement notice penalties. Some public liability or environmental insurance may cover fines for minor regulatory breaches, but often they exclude penalties. Check your policy.

Stay updated on amendments. Schedule 1 was amended in 2024. The list of offences and penalties may change again. Monitor the ACT legislation register for any future amendments to this regulation. Use the current republication (R2, effective 29 March 2024). Do not rely on outdated versions.

Staff training. If your organisation employs staff who work in nature reserves, parks, or other protected areas, train them to understand the activities that trigger infringement notices. For example, using a vehicle off road (section 306(2), penalty $600) is a common activity that can be ticketed. Ensure staff know the boundaries and rules of the areas they operate in.

Seek legal advice for complex situations. If you have received multiple notices, if the amount is significant, or if you have a defence, consult a lawyer experienced in ACT environment law. The infringement notice system is designed for straightforward cases; complex legal issues should be handled in court. The regulation is short, but the underlying Nature Conservation Act is lengthy and fact specific.