Magistrates Court (Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Infringement Notices) Regulation 2010

The regulation centres on a small set of interlocking statutory concepts: infringement notice offences (as defined by the Magistrates Court Act 1930, pt 3.8), infringement penalties (fixed dollar amounts for the purposes of the infringement notice scheme), authorised persons/authorised officers, administering authority, and prescribed notice contents.

• Infringement notice offences and the Magistrates Court Act machinery (s 7). The regulation explicitly applies part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act to the Tobacco Act provisions listed in Schedule 1. That is the gateway concept: once a Tobacco Act offence is listed in Schedule 1, the Magistrates Court Act’s infringement‑notice procedure becomes available for that offence.

• Infringement penalties (s 8 and Schedule 1). For each Schedule 1 item, column 3 records the offence penalty in penalty units and column 4 records the dollar amount recoverable under an infringement notice. Section 8(1) makes column 4 the statutory amount payable by an individual under an infringement notice for the named offence. Section 8(2) provides that a corporation’s infringement penalty is five times the amount in column 4. Section 8(3) fixes the administrative cost of serving a reminder notice at $34.

• Authorised person / authorised officer (s 12; Dictionary). The regulation borrows the authorised‑officer concept from the Tobacco Act: “authorised officer means an authorised officer under the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act, section 32” (Dictionary). Section 12 confirms that an authorised officer may serve infringement and reminder notices for the Tobacco Act items listed. Sections 9 and 11 specify how an authorised person must be identified on both infringement and reminder notices.

• Administering authority (s 6). The director‑general for the Tobacco Act is the administering authority for the infringement notice offences created by this regulation. That matters operationally because the administering authority manages the infringement notice scheme under the Magistrates Court Act (see s 6) and, under ss 9 and 11, is the agency that may allocate unique identifying numbers to authorised persons for use on notices.

• Content requirements for notices (ss 9-11, s 10(1)). Notices must identify the authorised person who served them (ss 9 and 11). Infringement notices served on companies must include the company’s ACN (s 10(1)); the regulation notes that this is additional to the Magistrates Court Act, s 121(1)(c) requirement.

• Cross‑statutory definitions and editorial machinery. The Dictionary makes clear that many definitions are taken from the Legislation Act 2001 and the Magistrates Court Act 1930 (Dictionary, notes). The republication material states that editorial amendments have been applied under the Legislation Act 2001, part 11.3 (preamble and endnotes), affecting drafting and presentation but not substance.

These concepts combine to create a constrained enforcement pathway: a specified set of Tobacco Act offences can be addressed by on‑the‑spot or administrative infringement notices that have fixed dollar amounts, must meet particular content standards, and are administered by the director‑general with authorised officers designated under the Tobacco Act serving notices.

The regulation assigns costs and decision‑rights across several identifiable groups.

• Individuals who commit the listed Tobacco Act offences. Section 8(1) fixes the dollar amount that an individual is required to pay if served with an infringement notice for a Schedule 1 offence. Schedule 1, column 4 lists the amounts (for example, $1,000 for items 1-6, $1,600 for item 7, $110 for items 8-16, with specific variation by item).

• Corporations that commit the listed offences. Corporations face a different financial exposure: s 8(2) makes the corporation’s infringement penalty five times the amount listed for an individual. The regulation therefore treats corporate liability differently on its face; the corporate payer pays the multiplication automatically under the infringement regime. The corporation’s identity also triggers an additional content requirement: s 10(1) requires an ACN on an infringement notice served on a company.

• Authorised officers under the Tobacco Act. The people empowered to serve infringement notices and reminder notices are the authorised officers defined under the Tobacco Act, s 32 (Dictionary), and s 12 confirms those authorised officers may serve the notices described. Police officers are treated as a subclass for identification purposes (ss 9 and 11). The administering authority may assign unique identification numbers for non‑police authorised persons, and those numbers may appear on notices (ss 9(b)(ii) and 11(b)(ii)).

• The administering authority (director‑general for the Tobacco Act). The director‑general is the agency responsible for administering these infringement notice offences (s 6). Practically, the director‑general will allocate any unique numbers to authorised persons, receive and process infringement notices under the Magistrates Court Act framework, and be responsible for record‑keeping and compliance obligations associated with the scheme.

• Courts and the Magistrates Court Act machinery. While the regulation creates an infringement route, it does so under the Magistrates Court Act’s part 3.8 framework (s 7). That framework remains the legal vehicle for follow‑up enforcement, adjudication of defaults or appeals, and conversion to prosecution where applicable , although the regulation itself does not reproduce the Magistrates Court Act’s procedural rules.

• Businesses that supply tobacco or facilities where smoking or other smoking products are used. The Schedule cross‑references particular Tobacco Act provisions (e.g., 8(1), 8(2), 9(3), etc.). Although the textual content of those Tobacco Act provisions is not reproduced in the regulation, the inclusion of many offences suggests that vendors, hosts, venue operators and similar actors regulated by the Tobacco Act will be affected if their conduct falls within the listed provisions.

• Agencies responsible for administration and enforcement costs. The regulation fixes the cost of serving a reminder notice at $34 (s 8(3)). That establishes an administrative cost item that the administering authority or other enforcement agency will collect or account for under the infringement notice and reminder procedures.

Who makes decisions: authorised officers decide to serve infringement notices and reminder notices (s 12); the administering authority provides unique numbers and administers the scheme overall (s 6). Who pays: individuals and corporations named on infringement notices pay the fixed amounts in Schedule 1, with corporations paying 5x the individual amount (s 8(1)-(2)). What changes for those affected: the ability of enforcement agencies to offer an infringement penalty as an alternative to criminal prosecution for the listed Tobacco Act offences (s 5 explanatory note; s 7).

This regulation imposes specific duties on administering authorities and authorised persons and creates statutory entitlements for recipients of notices.

Duties on the administering authority (s 6; ss 9(b)(ii) and 11(b)(ii)):

• The director‑general is the administering authority for infringement notice offences under the Tobacco Act (s 6). That creates administrative responsibilities under the Magistrates Court Act infringement scheme. The regulation also contemplates that the administering authority may assign unique identification numbers to authorised persons that can be used on notices (ss 9(b)(ii) and 11(b)(ii)). The administering authority therefore has the duty to allocate, and maintain records of, any unique numbers it issues.

Duties on authorised officers / authorised persons (ss 9, 11, 12):

• An authorised officer may serve infringement notices and reminder notices for the Schedule 1 offences (s 12). When serving a notice, the authorised person must identify themselves on the notice. For police officers, the required identifier is their service number; for non‑police authorised persons, the notice must include either the person’s full name (or surname and initials) or a unique number allocated by the administering authority (ss 9 and 11). These are strict content requirements for both infringement notices (s 9) and reminder notices (s 11).

Duties concerning company notices (s 10(1)):

• Where an infringement notice is served on a company (defined in s 10(2) as a company registered under the Corporations Act), the notice must include the company’s ACN (s 10(1)). The regulation notes this is additional to the requirement in the Magistrates Court Act, s 121(1)(c), thereby layering a further content duty onto notices served on companies.

Payment duties and exposure (s 8):

• Individuals served with an infringement notice are required to pay the amount specified in Schedule 1, column 4 for the relevant offence (s 8(1)). Corporations are required to pay five times the amount in Schedule 1, column 4 (s 8(2)). The regulation fixes the cost of serving a reminder notice at $34 (s 8(3)).

Rights and procedural implications:

• The regulation itself does not set out appeal rights, timeframes for payment, or the process that follows non‑payment; those procedural rights and obligations sit within the Magistrates Court Act, pt 3.8, which the regulation applies by reference (s 7). The explanatory note to s 5 characterises the infringement notice system as an alternative to prosecution. Therefore, recipients of infringement notices are given a statutory, administrative route to resolve alleged contraventions without court prosecution, subject to the procedural terms of the Magistrates Court Act.

Record‑keeping and information duties implied by content rules:

• Because the regulation requires identifying information for authorised persons and ACNs for companies (ss 9-11; s 10(1)), agencies and authorised officers must keep and make available the identification data that will be printed on notices (for example, officer service numbers, unique numbers issued by the administering authority, and company ACNs). Failure to include the required identification fields could render a notice defective under the content rules (see ss 9-11 and s 10(1)).

Cross‑referenced duties:

• The Dictionary indicates that a number of statutory terms come from the Legislation Act 2001 and the Magistrates Court Act 1930 (Dictionary, notes). Those source statutes contain additional duties and rights , for example, the Magistrates Court Act’s procedural rules for infringement notices and the Legislation Act’s definitional and editorial rules , which apply by cross‑reference. The regulation notes that the ACN requirement is supplementary to the Magistrates Court Act, s 121(1)(c) (s 10 note), thereby creating a duty to comply with both instruments when serving notices on companies.

In sum, the regulation imposes duties on the administering authority to allocate and manage unique identifiers, on authorised officers to include specified identifying information on notices, and on recipients (individuals and corporations) to pay fixed infringement amounts (with corporations subject to a 5x multiplier). The procedural rights and remedies for recipients are provided through the Magistrates Court Act’s infringement‑notice framework, which the regulation applies.

The regulation creates a fixed‑amount infringement regime and specifies enforcement modalities and administrative costs.

Infringement penalties (s 8(1) and Schedule 1, column 4):

• For each offence provision listed in Schedule 1 (column 2), Schedule 1, column 4 sets the dollar amount payable under an infringement notice by an individual. Examples from Schedule 1 include:
  • Items 1-6, 10, 11, 16: infringement penalty $1,000 (Schedule 1, column 4).
  • Item 7 (provision 22(1)): infringement penalty $1,600 (Schedule 1, column 4).
  • Items 8, 9, 12-15: infringement penalty $110 (Schedule 1, column 4).
• Section 8(1) is explicit: the penalty payable by an individual under an infringement notice for a Tobacco Act offence listed in Schedule 1 is the amount in Schedule 1, column 4.

Corporate multiplier (s 8(2)):

• Section 8(2) fixes the penalty payable by a corporation as five times the amount stated in Schedule 1, column 4 for the offence. The regulation therefore creates a differential financial exposure between individuals and corporations in the infringement‑notice context. For example, where Schedule 1 records an infringement penalty of $1,000 for an item, a corporation’s infringement penalty under the regulation is $5,000 (5 × $1,000).

Reminder notice cost (s 8(3)):

• The regulation fixes the cost of serving a reminder notice at $34 (s 8(3)). The regulation does not itself specify how that cost is recovered, but it is an explicit monetary item attached to the reminder notice procedure under the infringement notice framework.

Enforcement agents and identification requirements (ss 9-12):

• The enforcement actors under this regime are authorised officers as defined under the Tobacco Act, s 32 (Dictionary), and police officers are specifically recognised as a subcategory for identification purposes (ss 9 and 11). Section 12 specifies that an authorised officer may serve an infringement notice or a reminder notice for the Tobacco Act offences listed. Sections 9 and 11 require notices to identify the authorised person by service number (police officer) or name/unique number (non‑police authorised persons). These identification rules are material to enforcement because they set minimum standards for notice validity.

Procedural enforcement pathway (s 7; s 5 explanatory note):

• Section 7 brings the Magistrates Court Act, pt 3.8 infringement regime into operation for the listed Tobacco Act offences. The regulation therefore relies on the Magistrates Court Act for the remainder of the enforcement procedure: issuance, time for payment, non‑payment consequences, conversion to prosecution, and any objection or review mechanisms. The regulation itself does not reproduce those procedural rules, but it expressly relies on the Magistrates Court Act’s framework.

Interaction with company identification rules (s 10(1)):

• Infringement notices served on companies must include the ACN (s 10(1)). The regulation notes that this is additional to the requirements in Magistrates Court Act, s 121(1)(c). Including an ACN is a material compliance requirement for notices involving corporations and therefore relevant to enforceability.

Scope of monetary exposure vs. offence penalty units (Schedule 1, column 3):

• Schedule 1 also records the offence penalty expressed in penalty units in column 3. That figure is the statutory penalty (not the infringement penalty) for the listed Tobacco Act provision expressed in penalty units. The regulation does not convert those penalty units into dollar amounts; conversion depends on the applicable statute’s penalty‑unit scale. The republication notes include a separate statement that, at the republication date, the value of a penalty unit for an offence against this law is $160 for an individual and $810 for a corporation (prefatory note). However, that note appears to relate to offences against the regulation itself, not necessarily the Tobacco Act provisions listed in Schedule 1. Practitioners should therefore consult the underlying Tobacco Act and relevant penalty‑unit calculations when assessing total exposure beyond the infringement amounts fixed here.

Practical enforcement consequences:

• The regulation reduces transaction costs for enforcing certain Tobacco Act offences by fixing the administrative dollar amounts and prescribing minimal content on notices and reminders. It also places the onus on recipients to pay the specified amounts to resolve the matter outside court. The director‑general and authorised officers exercise practical discretion in issuing notices, but the regulation constrains the notice form by specifying required identifiers (ss 9-11). The Magistrates Court Act, pt 3.8, governs follow‑up steps; the regulation does not vary that part’s enforcement levers (s 7).

In short, enforcement under this regulation is an administrative, fixed‑amount mechanism: authorised officers serve notices that comply with content requirements (ss 9-11); individuals pay the listed dollar amounts; corporations pay five times that amount (s 8(2)); and reminder notices incur a $34 service cost (s 8(3)). The Magistrates Court Act provides the procedural enforcement apparatus into which this schedule feeds (s 7).

The regulation is explicitly cross‑referenced to, and dependent on, multiple other statutes and statutory instruments. The main cross‑statutory interactions are with the Magistrates Court Act 1930, the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act 1927, the Legislation Act 2001, and the Corporations Act.

Magistrates Court Act 1930 (s 7; s 5 note; s 10 note):

• The regulation operates by applying part 3.8 of the Magistrates Court Act to the listed Tobacco Act offences (s 7). Part 3.8 is the infringement notice regime and contains the procedural rules not repeated in this regulation. The regulation’s explanatory note (s 5 note) describes part 3.8 as providing an alternative to prosecution. Section 10(1) expressly states that the ACN requirement for company notices is additional to the requirement under the Magistrates Court Act 1930, s 121(1)(c), indicating that notice content requirements under the Magistrates Court Act continue to apply alongside the additional requirements in this regulation.

Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act 1927 (Schedule 1 and Dictionary):

• The offences listed in Schedule 1 cross‑reference provisions of the Tobacco Act (for example, 8(1), 8(2), 9(3), etc.). The regulation does not reproduce the substance of those offences; it merely adopts them as the infractions to which the Magistrates Court infringement machinery will apply (s 7). The Dictionary borrows the Tobacco Act’s definition of “authorised officer” (Dictionary). Section 12 permits authorised officers under the Tobacco Act to serve infringement and reminder notices. Operationally, authorised‑officer powers and appointment processes are governed by the Tobacco Act (s 32), and the regulatory scheme here depends on that statute for the identity and limits of authorised officers.

Legislation Act 2001 (preamble and Dictionary notes):

• The republication preamble and notes expressly rely on the Legislation Act’s provisions dealing with definition carriage, editorial amendments, and penalty unit values. The Dictionary notes state that the Legislation Act contains definitions and other provisions relevant to the regulation (Dictionary, Note 2). The front matter also states that editorial amendments have been applied under the Legislation Act 2001, part 11.3, and identifies the effect of those editorial changes (preamble). Practitioners must therefore be alert to Legislation Act provisions on definitions, penalty units, and editorial amendments when interpreting the regulation.

Corporations Act (s 10(2)):

• Section 10(2) defines “company” for the purposes of s 10(1) as “a company registered under the Corporations Act.” Section 10(1) requires that an infringement notice served on such a company include the company’s ACN. This imports a Corporations Act identification requirement into the notice content rules and ensures company identity is precise on notices.

Penalty‑unit interactions:

• Schedule 1, column 3 records offence penalties in penalty units. Converting those penalty units into dollar amounts requires reference to the relevant penalty‑unit scale , typically specified in the relevant Act or the Legislation Act. The republication preface contains a note on the value of a penalty unit “for an offence against this law” at the republication date, but the regulation does not itself recalculate penalty unit totals for the Tobacco Act offences; those remain as penalty‑unit quantities in Schedule 1, column 3. Practitioners must therefore consult the underlying statutes and statutory instruments that set penalty‑unit values for the offence, as conversion is not intrinsic to this regulation.

Editorial and amendment history (endnotes):

• The legislation history and amendment history in the endnotes show how the regulation has been renamed and amended over time, notably by the Smoke‑Free Legislation Amendment Act 2016 and the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Amendment Act 2025 (endnotes). The Legislation Act’s editorial amendment powers (part 11.3) were used for republication formatting and minor adjustments; those editorial amendments do not alter substantive outcomes but do affect how the text appears (preamble).

Operational interaction summary:

• The regulation is not a freestanding enforcement code; it is a scheduling and content instrument that integrates with the Magistrates Court Act’s infringement procedure and the Tobacco Act’s substantive offence framework. It also borrows definitional and administrative structures from the Legislation Act and the Corporations Act. Practitioners and administrators must therefore read this regulation in tandem with the Magistrates Court Act 1930, the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act 1927, the Legislation Act 2001 and the Corporations Act to understand fully the procedural, definitional and monetary consequences of issuing, contesting, or enforcing an infringement notice that arises under this regulation.

The regulation has been amended, renamed and republished multiple times since first being made in 2010. The endnotes and amendment history included in the republication provide the authoritative timeline of changes.

Key steps in the amendment history:

• Original instrument: The Magistrates Court (Tobacco Infringement Notices) Regulation 2010 was notified LR 7 December 2010 and commenced on 8 December 2010 (legislation history). This is the original regulation that instituted the infringement‑notice linkage to the Tobacco Act.

• Administrative and technical amendments: The Administrative (One ACT Public Service Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2011 A2011‑22 made amendments that commenced 1 July 2011 for some parts (legislation history; amendment history entry). These appear to be administrative changes to the regulation’s operation or cross‑references; the amendment history records s 6, the administering authority provision, as amended by A2011‑22 (amdt 1.325 noted).

• Statute Law Amendment Act 2013 A2013‑19: Amended parts of the regulation, with commencement recorded 14 June 2013 for the substantive amendments (legislation history). The amendment history records changes to s 6 and other provisions.

• Statute Law Amendment Act 2015 A2015‑15: Further technical amendments with commencement 10 June 2015 (legislation history). Section 12 (authorised people for infringement notice offences) was amended by the 2015 Act (amdt 3.133, 3.134).

• Renaming and substantive rework in 2016: The Smoke‑Free Legislation Amendment Act 2016 A2016‑20 renamed the instrument from the Magistrates Court (Tobacco Infringement Notices) Regulation 2010 to the Magistrates Court (Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Infringement Notices) Regulation 2010 (see legislation history and amendment history, s 1 sub A2016‑20 amdt 1.3 and Schedule 1 hdg sub A2016‑20 amdt 1.5). The 2016 amendments adjusted multiple provisions (s 5 purpose, s 7, s 8, s 9, s 10, s 11, s 12) and introduced the new definition of “Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act” in the Dictionary (amdt 1.8). Those amendments took effect 1 August 2016 (legislation history).

• Most recent amendment in 2025: The Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Amendment Act 2025 A2025‑36 amended Schedule 1 (sch 1 am A2025‑36 amdt 1.1) and commenced 16 December 2025 for the schedule changes (legislation history). The republication notes indicate items were renumbered in R6 as a result of the 2025 amendments.

Editorial republications and editorial changes:

• The Parliamentary Counsel’s Office has issued authorised republications at several points (R1 through R6). The republication preface states that the Legislation Act 2001, part 11.3, authorised editorial amendments have been applied where appropriate; editorial changes do not change the effect of the law but take effect as if made by an Act commencing on the republication date (preamble). The Amendment history explicitly notes which sections were subjected to editorial changes or amendments under the various Acts.

Implications of amendment history:

• The regulation’s core structure , bringing specific Tobacco Act offences into the Magistrates Court Act infringement regime, fixing infringement penalties, identifying authorising authorities and setting notice content requirements , has remained stable. However, the list of offences in Schedule 1, the precise infringement penalty amounts, and the definitional references have been adjusted over time. The most recent 2025 amendment directly modified Schedule 1, which is the operative list of offences and the place where the practical monetary amounts are set (endnotes).

Practical takeaway for compliance and advice:

• Because Schedule 1 is the operative list and has been recently amended, practitioners should check the latest schedule entries and any renumbering (R6) when advising clients or preparing enforcement materials. The administering authority and authorised officer definitions were also updated in the 2016 package; accordingly, agencies should ensure internal policies (for example, unique identifier systems and record keeping for authorised officers) reflect the current statutory wording. The republication notes and endnotes supply the authoritative amendment trail for statutory interpretation and enforcement planning.

The republished regulation and the accompanying endnotes do not record any litigation history and do not cite any judicial decisions. The document’s endnotes and legislation history are limited to statutory amendments, republication notes, and editorial adjustments. There are no cases, appeals, or tribunal decisions embedded in the text of the regulation or its endnotes.

Consequences of absent litigation references:

• Where a regulation or statute list contains no litigation history in its republication materials, practitioners must rely on primary legislation and administrative practice for legal interpretation, supplemented by any relevant case law that interprets the underlying acts (for example, the Magistrates Court Act or the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act). Because the regulation imports and operates through the Magistrates Court Act, any contested enforcement matters , disputes over the validity of notices, challenges to identity or content, or arguments about conversion to prosecution , will be litigated under the procedural and substantive frameworks of the Magistrates Court and applicable criminal or regulatory law. That litigation may not be referenced here, but it would govern the practical operation of the regime.

Practical approach in absence of appellate guidance:

• In the absence of reported litigation specific to this regulation, compliance and enforcement practice must be built around the following:
  • Strict adherence to the content requirements for infringement and reminder notices (ss 9-11, s 10(1)), because defective notices are commonly a ground for procedural challenge.
  • Accurate use of identifiers: police officer service numbers and the unique numbers allocated by the administering authority, if any. Failure to include required identifying information may expose the issuing agency to administrative challenge.
  • Correct application of the corporate multiplier (s 8(2)) and the reminder notice cost (s 8(3)) to prevent inadvertent under‑ or overcharging.
  • Ensuring that enforcement officers are properly appointed and authorised under the Tobacco Act, s 32, as the regulation ties serving powers to that status (Dictionary; s 12).

Where litigation arises, courts will interpret the regulation together with the Magistrates Court Act and the Tobacco Act. Given the regulation’s cross‑referencing approach, legal argument is likely to focus on statutory interpretation of content requirements, the validity of notices, and whether the infringement route was properly applied in the circumstances. Because none of that jurisprudence is recorded in the instrument, practitioners must search external case law and tribunal decisions relevant to the Magistrates Court Act infringement scheme and the Tobacco Act more broadly.

The regulation is compact, but it contains several concrete drafting and operational features that create practical traps for enforcement agencies, authorised officers, companies and advisers.

1. Distinction between penalty‑unit penalty and infringement penalty (Schedule 1, column 3 and column 4; s 8(1)).

• Schedule 1 records the statutory offence penalty in penalty units (column 3) and the infringement penalty in dollars (column 4). Practitioners must not conflate the two. The regulation makes clear that the infringement penalty is a fixed dollar amount for the purposes of the infringement notice scheme (s 8(1)), whereas the penalty‑unit entry reflects the full statutory penalty expressed in penalty units for that Tobacco Act provision. Conversion of penalty units to dollar figures requires reference to the relevant Act’s penalty‑unit schedule; the regulation does not perform that conversion for Tobacco Act penalties. Misreading column 3 as the infringement amount or miscalculating conversions can produce incorrect charging or advice.

2. Corporate multiplier is automatic and significant (s 8(2)).

• The regulation fixes corporate liability at five times the individual infringement amount (s 8(2)). That is a simple numeric rule that can easily be overlooked when preparing notices. For example, an item showing $1,000 in Schedule 1, column 4 exposes a corporation to $5,000 under the infringement route. Agencies must ensure their IT, enforcement templates and staff apply the multiplier correctly. Advisers should check whether clients structured as companies are receiving notices with the correct corporate rate.

3. Required identification fields on notices (ss 9 and 11).

• Infringement and reminder notices must identify the authorised person by specific identifiers: police officers by service number; other authorised persons by full name or a unique number issued by the administering authority (ss 9 and 11). Failure to include the required information will produce a notice that does not comply with the regulation’s content rules; that may create grounds to contest the notice under the Magistrates Court Act infringement procedure. Ensure that authorised officers’ service numbers or administering‑authority‑issued unique numbers are available and recorded at the time of service.

4. ACN requirement for company notices is additional, not substitutive (s 10(1) and note).

• If a notice is served on a company, the notice must include the ACN (s 10(1)). The regulation explicitly states this is additional to the Magistrates Court Act, s 121(1)(c) requirement (s 10 note). Agencies must therefore ensure company notices carry both sets of required identification fields. Failure to include an ACN, or including an incorrect ACN, may affect enforceability and create practical difficulties where multiple company names exist.

5. Who can serve notices is tied to Tobacco Act authorised officers (s 12; Dictionary).

• Section 12 limits the power to serve infringement and reminder notices to an “authorised officer” under the Tobacco Act, s 32 (Dictionary). Enforcement by poorly appointed or improperly authorised persons risks a procedural challenge. Agencies must confirm the statutory appointment process under the Tobacco Act and ensure field officers carry proof of authorisation.

6. Reminder‑notice cost is fixed but recovery mechanics are outside the regulation (s 8(3)).

• The regulation fixes the cost of serving a reminder notice at $34 (s 8(3)). It does not set out how that cost is recovered or when it is added to the debt; those details are governed by the Magistrates Court Act part 3.8. Agencies must reconcile local billing or IT systems to ensure reminder costs are properly captured and to avoid double recovery or mis‑applied charges.

7. Recent amendments may have renumbered items (endnotes).

• The 2025 amendment (A2025‑36) modified Schedule 1 and items were renumbered (legislation history and amendment history). Practitioners must use the current republication (R6, effective 16 December 2025) when identifying the correct schedule item and associated dollar amount. Reliance on an earlier version can lead to issuing a notice under an outdated schedule or incorrect amount.

8. Interplay with Magistrates Court Act procedure creates procedural risk (s 7).

• The regulation does not reproduce the Magistrates Court Act’s procedures for serving, paying, contesting or converting unpaid infringements to prosecutions. Those procedural rules are the substantive engine of enforcement, and any defects in notice content or procedural delivery may be litigated under the Magistrates Court Act. Do not assume the regulation supplies the complete enforcement process; consult part 3.8 directly.

9. Editorial amendments and definitions are influenced by the Legislation Act (preamble and Dictionary notes).

• Because the regulation relies on definitions and editorial machinery from the Legislation Act 2001 (Dictionary and preamble), practitioners must be mindful that definitions such as “individual”, “corporation”, “director‑general” and “police officer” are pulled from the Legislation Act and the Magistrates Court Act. Misapplication of anundefined term may cause procedural or interpretive errors.

10. Lack of litigation history in the instrument means uncertain judicial gloss.

• The absence of litigation history in the republication materials means there is no statutory record in this instrument of judicial interpretation. That increases the practical importance of strict compliance with the text; expect that contested cases will require careful argument about the intersection with the Magistrates Court Act and the Tobacco Act.

In short, the most common operational traps are: using the wrong numeric base (penalty units vs infringement dollar amounts), forgetting the corporation multiplier, omitting required identifiers (service number, name, unique number, ACN), serving notices through persons who are not properly authorised under the Tobacco Act, and failing to reconcile reminder costs with procedural recovery rules in the Magistrates Court Act.

Compliance under this regulation requires coordinated administrative governance between the administering authority (director‑general), enforcement officers (authorised officers), and back‑office processing. The steps below are practical, statutory‑grounded checklists and controls that flow directly from the regulation’s provisions.

1. Confirm the authorised officer status of serving personnel (s 12; Dictionary).

   • Ensure every person authorised to serve infringement or reminder notices is formally appointed under the Tobacco and Other Smoking Products Act, s 32, and that appointment records are current and accessible. Only authorised officers may serve the notices (s 12). Maintain written appointment records and carry proof of authorisation for field officers.

2. Establish and maintain unique identifier systems for authorised persons (ss 9(b)(ii) and 11(b)(ii); s 6).

   • The administering authority (director‑general) may provide unique numbers for authorised persons to use on notices (ss 9 and 11). If the administering authority elects to give unique numbers, set up a register linking officer names, appointment dates, and unique numbers. Ensure that enforcement templates include fields for: police service number (if applicable), full name or surname and initials (for non‑police authorised persons), and/or the unique administering‑authority number.

3. Train officers on required notice content and format (ss 9-11; s 10(1)).

   • Train authorised officers to include the following on infringement notices and reminder notices:
     • If the server is a police officer, include the officer’s service number (ss 9(a), 11(a)).
     • If the server is another authorised person, include either full name (or surname and initials) or unique number provided by the administering authority (ss 9(b)(i)-(ii), 11(b)(i)-(ii)).
     • If the recipient is a company, include the company’s ACN (s 10(1)). This is in addition to the Magistrates Court Act content requirements (s 10 note).
   • Use standardised templates to ensure required data fields cannot be skipped.

4. Apply the correct monetary amounts and multipliers (s 8(1)-(3); Schedule 1).

   • Configure enforcement software and forms to pull the correct infringement penalty from Schedule 1, column 4 for the relevant Tobacco Act provision and to apply a fivefold multiplier for corporations (s 8(2)). Hardcode the reminder‑notice cost $34 into the reminder process (s 8(3)). Ensure templates and receipts reflect the applicable non‑court payment amount.

5. Keep authoritative version control for Schedule 1 (endnotes; legislation history).

   • Because Schedule 1 has been amended (most recently in 2025), hold the current republication as the authoritative source for listed offences and dollar amounts (R6 effective 16 December 2025). Ensure that IT, training materials and staff are updated promptly when Schedule 1 is amended.

6. Integrate with Magistrates Court Act procedural requirements (s 7; s 5 note).

   • The regulation operates under the Magistrates Court Act, pt 3.8. Ensure teams understand the procedural timelines, review rights and default enforcement processes contained in part 3.8. Design workflows for issuing notices, accepting payments, issuing reminder notices (including the $34 cost), and initiating further action under the Magistrates Court Act where required.

7. Validate company identity and ACN accuracy (s 10(1)-(2)).

   • For company recipients, verify the ACN with the Corporations Act register before issuing a notice and put it on the notice as required (s 10(1)-(2)). Mistakes in the ACN field are a predictable challenge and can undermine enforcement.

8. Retain robust audit trails and records (ss 9-11; s 6).

   • Maintain records showing who served the notice (including the identifying number or service number used), the time and place of service, the notice data entered, and proof of service. The director‑general’s records for unique numbers, officer authorisations, and notice templates should be auditable.

9. Reconcile reminder‑notice charging mechanics to avoid double recovery (s 8(3)).

   • Implement billing systems that add the $34 reminder‑notice cost only where statutorily appropriate and in the manner prescribed by the Magistrates Court Act framework. Clear customer communications should itemise any reminder costs.

10. Prepare for contestation and evidentiary challenges (ss 9-11; s 7).

• Because defects in identifying the authorised person or company are likely to be litigated, ensure that field evidence (officer statements, body‑worn camera footage, witness statements, name/ID details) is contemporaneously collected and stored. Prepare officer scripts to ensure the required identifying information is captured at time of service.

11. Liaise between enforcement and legal teams on scope of offences (Schedule 1, column 2).

• The regulation lists Tobacco Act provisions by cross‑reference. Enforcement and legal teams should jointly verify, for each enforcement scenario, that the conduct actually falls within the statutory language of the cited Tobacco Act provision before issuing an infringement notice.

12. Update policies and communications after legislative amendments (amendment history).

• Because the regulation has been modified previously (see endnotes) and may be amended again, designate a compliance lead responsible for tracking legislative changes, updating templates and advising stakeholders. The republication endnotes provide the amendment trail and should be consulted for precise commencement dates.

Practical checklist for an authorised officer issuing a notice:

• Confirm authorised officer status and carry proof of appointment.
• Confirm the correct Tobacco Act provision and the corresponding Schedule 1 item.
• Determine recipient status: individual or company.
• If company, verify ACN and include it on the notice (s 10(1)).
• Include the authorised person identifier: police service number or full name/initials or administering‑authority unique number (ss 9 and 11).
• Apply the correct infringement amount and apply the 5× multiplier for corporations (s 8(1)-(2)).
• If the notice goes unpaid, ensure reminder process includes $34 service cost and that timelines in the Magistrates Court Act are followed (s 8(3) and s 7).
• File evidence of service and retain an audit trail for any contested matter.

Following these steps will align operational practice with the regulation’s textual requirements and the broader procedural framework of the Magistrates Court Act under which this regime operates.