Shop Theft (Alternative Enforcement) Act 2000

Minor shop theft, shop theft infringement notice and “effective consent” are the Act’s core legal concepts, each given a statutory meaning and operational role. “Minor shop theft” is theft from a shop where the goods’ value is at or below the prescribed upper limit (s 3(1)). The statute sets default monetary thresholds in the absence of regulations: a prescribed amount defaulting to $30 and a prescribed upper limit defaulting to $150; both may be adjusted by regulation using a CPI formula specified in s 3(3). The Act gives a mechanism for measuring value: the value is taken to be the retail price at the shop on the day in question, or if there is no retail price, the replacement cost to the victim (s 3(2)).

A “shop theft infringement notice” is the statutory instrument used by police to offer diversion rather than formal charging (s 4). There are two statutory forms referenced: Schedule 1 for goods at or below the prescribed amount, and Schedule 2 for goods valued above the prescribed amount (s 4(3)). The notice contains Parts B, C and D (s 4(4), s 5, s 6), which set out information to be read to the alleged offender, a statement the alleged offender signs admitting the offence and undertaking specified actions, and a police officer’s confirmation that it is appropriate to deal with the person under the Act.

“Effective consent” is a legal precondition to the diversion outcome; the Act defines detailed, context‑specific steps that constitute effective consent. For goods at or below the prescribed amount, immediate on‑the‑spot steps (apology in the presence of police, payment for damaged goods where applicable, completion and signature of Part C admitting the offence and undertaking to accept a caution, and police confirmation in Part D) will establish effective consent (s 5(a)). Alternatively for those goods, attendance at a specified police station within 48 hours with similar signatures and arrangements for apology can constitute effective consent (s 5(b)). For goods above the prescribed amount the accused must attend the specified police station within 48 hours, pay for damaged goods where applicable, accept obligations including community service calculated at one hour for every $5 (or part thereof) of the goods’ value to be completed within six months, report to a community corrections officer within two working days of giving consent and obey that officer’s lawful directions, and sign the prescribed statement (s 6). If effective consent is not given, the person may be charged with theft (s 7).

Evidentiary and confidentiality concepts mediate how information arising from the Act can be used. Admissions made by an accused in the course of effective consent are inadmissible in other proceedings except with the person’s consent, or in proceedings under s 12 (breach) or police disciplinary proceedings (s 15). The Commissioner of Police must keep records of names, details of allegations and undertakings for at least five years (s 16). Persons involved in administration are under a confidentiality duty and face a maximum penalty of $10,000 for prohibited disclosure, subject to enumerated exceptions, including disclosure to members of the police force for record keeping or law enforcement purposes, to the alleged offender or their legal representative, to the victim consistent with s 10, for police complaints and discipline purposes, or when required for legal proceedings (s 17(1)(a)-(e)).

Community service is the Act’s principal non‑monetary sanction for higher value minor shop theft. Schedule 3 treats a person required to perform community service under the notice as an offender for the purposes of Division 4 of Part 2 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 (Schedule 3 cl 2). Schedule 3 also sets minimum and maximum weekly hour limits (minimum 4 hours per week, maximum 24 hours per week), constraints on continuous work blocks and meal breaks, protections regarding interference with remunerated employment or training, and a prohibition on remuneration for community service (Schedule 3 cl 3). The Minister and the Chief Executive have delegated administrative powers to extend, waive or alter hours, and to increase hours upon default, with statutory limits (Schedule 3 cl 6-9).

The Act identifies multiple, specifically affected actors and allocates roles, costs and decision‑making among them. The immediate parties are: alleged offenders (must be aged 18 or over and not employees of the victim to be eligible , s 4(1)(b)); victims (the proprietor of the shop or the proprietor’s agent , s 3(1)); police officers (who decide whether to issue a notice and must meet the statutory satisfaction criteria , s 4(1), s 4(4)); the Commissioner of Police (responsible for record keeping and reporting , s 16-18); the Chief Executive under the Sentencing Act 2017 (who receives notices that impose community service and assigns a community corrections officer , Schedule 3 cl 4); community corrections officers (who supervise and direct community service performance , Schedule 3 cl 4-5); and the Minister with administrative powers under Schedule 3 (powers to extend timeframes, waive hours, increase hours for default , Schedule 3 cl 6-9).

Alleged offenders: The Act affects the legal exposure and obligations of adults accused of designated shop thefts. Eligible alleged offenders face an administrative choice: accept the notice and comply with its undertakings (apology, payment, caution, community service where applicable) in exchange for no prosecution on that allegation (s 13); or decline effective consent and face the ordinary criminal prosecution process (s 7). Those who accept undertake obligations that carry potential criminal sanction on breach (s 12). The Act also sets strict procedural time windows,48 hours to attend a police station after issue in many cases (s 5(b), s 6(a)), and a six‑month deadline to complete community service for higher value incidents (s 6(d)(C)).

Victims and retailers: The proprietor (or agent) must consent to the diversion; their consent is a statutory precondition that cannot be withdrawn once given (s 4(1)(c), s 4(2)). The Act therefore gives victims direct control over whether the alternative process is available. Victims may be entitled to payment for damaged or removed goods in the immediate arrangements (s 5(a)(ii), s 5(b)(ii), s 6(b)). Police must offer to provide information to the victim about how the matter was dealt with (s 10). Retailers who choose to consent are thereby constrained by the irrevocability rule (s 4(2)).

Police: Police officers have gatekeeper functions that require exercise of discretion. Before issuing a notice an officer must be satisfied on defined factual points, including that there is sufficient evidence on which a court could reasonably find guilt, that the alleged offender is not an employee, and that the alleged theft is not part of a pattern or organised scheme (s 4(1)(a)-(e)). The officer must read Part B of the notice to the accused (s 4(4)), confirm appropriateness in Part D (s 5(a)(iv), s 5(b)(v), s 6(e)), and forward community service notices promptly to the Chief Executive (Schedule 3 cl 4(1)). The Commissioner of Police must maintain records for five years and include reporting to Parliament annually (s 16, s 18).

Community corrections and the Minister: When community service is required, the Chief Executive under the Sentencing Act 2017 assigns a community corrections officer and must notify the alleged offender of the officer’s name and reporting arrangements (Schedule 3 cl 4). Community corrections officers have statutory authority to give reasonable directions about reporting times, tasks and conduct while undertaking service (Schedule 3 cl 5). The Minister has specified administrative powers to extend timeframes (Schedule 3 cl 6), waive impossibility or impracticality (Schedule 3 cl 7), waive unperformed hours in appropriate cases (Schedule 3 cl 8), and increase hours on default (Schedule 3 cl 9).

Administrative actors: The Commissioner and the police force carry data‑management and reporting responsibilities (s 16-18), and staff involved in administration are under confidentiality obligations subject to exceptions (s 17). The evidentiary provisions provide that a properly completed notice or community corrections certificate constitutes prima facie proof of consent and undertakings in the absence of proof to the contrary (s 12(2)-(3), Schedule 3 cl 11), which affects how agencies document and resource compliance checking.

Excluded parties: Persons under 18 and employees of the victim are excluded from eligibility (s 4(1)(b)). The Act therefore does not operate as an alternative to juvenile justice processes or as a remedy for employee theft cases.

The Act assigns concrete duties and rights to the parties involved and prescribes procedural protections and limitations.

Duties and powers of police:

• Before issuing a shop theft infringement notice the police officer must be satisfied on several statutory criteria including age, employment status, victim consent, absence of suspected pattern behaviour or organised scheme, and sufficiency of evidence to support conviction (s 4(1)(a)-(e)). The officer may issue a notice only if satisfied (s 4(1)).
• The officer must read the information in Part B of the notice aloud when issuing it (s 4(4)).
• If the notice requires community service, the officer must ensure the Chief Executive receives a copy promptly (Schedule 3 cl 4(1)).
• The issuing officer must complete Part D confirming appropriateness when the alleged offender signs Part C (s 5(a)(iv), s 5(b)(v), s 6(e)).

Rights and duties of the victim:

• The victim must give consent to the alleged offender’s being dealt with under the Act before a notice can be issued (s 4(1)(c)). The Act states that victim consent cannot be withdrawn once given (s 4(2)).
• The victim has the right to be asked whether they want to be provided with information about how the offence was dealt with and, if so, to receive that information (s 10).
• The victim has the right to receive the value of goods paid to the police officer where goods were damaged or no longer in the condition displayed for sale as a result of the alleged offender’s actions; the police officer must forward or make that amount available for collection by the victim (s 5(a)(ii), s 5(b)(ii), s 6(b)).

Rights and duties of the alleged offender:

• Eligibility precondition: the alleged offender must be 18 or over and not an employee of the victim to be eligible for the alternative process (s 4(1)(b)).
• Effective consent requires admission and undertakings. For low‑value incidents this can be immediate on the spot or by attendance within 48 hours (s 5). For higher value incidents attendance within 48 hours, payment if applicable, signing the undertaking to complete community service and reporting to a community corrections officer within two working days are required (s 6).
• On effective consent the person is not liable to prosecution for the theft alleged in the notice (s 13).
• The alleged offender must not breach an undertaking without reasonable excuse, with proof of excuse on the person, and breaches attract a maximum penalty of $1,250 (s 12(1)-(2)).
• The accused has a limited withdrawal right for immediate on‑the‑spot consent cases: an accused who effectively consented immediately after issue in the presence of police may withdraw within 48 hours by personally attending the specified police station and advising in writing, unless the accused has paid the victim the value of the goods (s 8(1)-(3)).

Community corrections duties and Ministerial powers:

• A person required to perform community service is treated as an offender for Division 4, Part 2 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 (Schedule 3 cl 2).
• The community corrections officer may give reasonable directions about reporting times, tasks, courses, and conduct while performing the service (Schedule 3 cl 5). The Chief Executive must notify the person in writing of the officer and reporting arrangements (Schedule 3 cl 4(3)).
• The Minister can extend the period for performance by up to six months on application by the person or the Chief Executive (Schedule 3 cl 6); may waive compliance where it is not possible or practicable for reasons stated (Schedule 3 cl 7); may waive unperformed hours where substantial compliance and other criteria are met, with a cap of 10 hours per notice (Schedule 3 cl 8); and may increase hours on breach, though not by more than 24 hours in aggregate (Schedule 3 cl 9). Increasing hours, if exercised under cl 9(1) and notified personally, varies the undertaking and precludes prosecution in relation to that breach (Schedule 3 cl 9(2)).

Record‑keeping and confidentiality duties:

• The Commissioner of Police must keep a record of the name of the alleged offender issued with a notice who has effectively consented, the details of allegations, and the undertakings, for at least five years after consent (s 16(1)-(2)).
• Persons engaged in administration may not disclose information relating to a shop theft infringement notice except in listed circumstances (s 17(1)(a)-(e)); breach of this confidentiality provision carries a maximum penalty of $10,000 (s 17(1)).

Evidentiary rights and presumptions:

• In proceedings under s 12 (breach of undertaking) an apparently genuine notice or copy duly completed and signed constitutes, absent proof to the contrary, proof that the named person effectively consented and of the terms of the undertakings (s 12(2)). A genuine certificate from a community corrections officer certifying non‑attendance is similarly prima facie proof (s 12(3)). Schedule 3 cl 11 provides the same evidentiary rule for Ministerial certificates.

Inadmissibility protections:

• Admissions made as part of effective consent are inadmissible in other proceedings except with the consent of the person or where the proceedings are for breach of s 12 or disciplinary proceedings against a police officer related to the notice (s 15(1)-(2)).

The Act provides a limited set of criminal sanctions and administrative enforcement responses to non‑compliance with undertakings contained in shop theft infringement notices.

Primary criminal offence for breach:

• Section 12 makes it an offence for a person who has effectively consented under a shop theft infringement notice to breach an undertaking specified in the notice without reasonable excuse. The maximum penalty for that offence is $1,250. The Act expressly places the onus of proof for reasonable excuse on the person alleged to have breached (s 12(1)).

Evidentiary presumptions to assist enforcement:

• Section 12(2) provides that in proceedings for an offence under s 12 an apparently genuine shop theft infringement notice or copy, duly completed and signed, constitutes, in the absence of proof to the contrary, proof that the person named in the notice effectively consented and proof of the terms of the undertakings specified. Section 12(3) provides that a genuine certificate from a community corrections officer certifying non‑attendance similarly constitutes proof in the absence of contrary proof. Schedule 3 cl 11 supplements this by stating that a genuine Ministerial certificate relating to the exercise of the Minister’s powers is proof absent disproof.

Administrative alternatives for community service breaches:

• Schedule 3 provides the Minister with a statutory toolbox to respond to breach or incapacity to perform community service. The Minister may extend the period for completion by up to six months on application (Schedule 3 cl 6). The Minister may waive the obligation where the Chief Executive reports impracticability or other sufficient reason (Schedule 3 cl 7). The Minister may, on application, waive unperformed hours where the person has substantially complied and other conditions are met, subject to a cap of 10 hours per notice (Schedule 3 cl 8). On breach by failing to obey directions of a community corrections officer, the Minister may increase the number of hours required (Schedule 3 cl 9(1)); such an increase, when notified in writing, varies the undertaking and precludes prosecution in relation to that breach (Schedule 3 cl 9(2)(b)). The increase itself is capped at 24 hours in aggregate (Schedule 3 cl 9(3)).

Reporting enforcement escalations:

• Schedule 3 cl 10 requires the Minister to notify the Commissioner of Police if the Minister is satisfied the person has breached an undertaking to perform community service, unless the Minister regards the breach as trivial or otherwise dealt with under the Schedule. If proceedings are commenced addressing breach, the community service requirements cease to have further operation (Schedule 3 cl 10(2)).

Confidentiality enforcement:

• Section 17(1) imposes a statutory prohibition on disclosing information concerning an infringement notice obtained in the administration of the Act, subject to enumerated exceptions. The maximum penalty for unauthorised disclosure is $10,000. Section 17(2) clarifies that this confidentiality duty does not derogate from s 15’s inadmissibility provisions; section 17(3) allows dissemination of statistical or other non‑identifying aggregated information.

Prosecution availability where consent not given:

• If an alleged offender does not effectively consent to being dealt with under the Act, the person may be charged with theft on the original allegation (s 7). Conversely, where a person has effectively consented and complied, s 13 states the person is not liable to prosecution for the theft the notice concerned.

Limits on procedural objections in later prosecutions:

• Section 14 bars defendants in subsequent theft prosecutions from arguing that a shop theft infringement notice should have been issued or that they should have been allowed to effectively consent under the Act. This prevents defendants from invoking the Act as a defence to the absence of diversion.

Inadmissibility and exceptions:

• Section 15 bars adducing in other proceedings an admission made by or for the purposes of effective consent, unless the person consents, except for proceedings for an offence under s 12 or disciplinary proceedings against police officers relating to the notice.

Administrative transparency:

• The Commissioner of Police must maintain records (s 16) and include information about the scheme in the Commissioner’s annual report required under the Police Act 1998 (s 18). These duties support both internal enforcement oversight and parliamentary reporting.

The Act cross‑references, and in practice relies on, other instruments and statutes to allocate administrative and enforcement functions. Those linkages determine allocation of executive responsibility and the statutory environment in which the diversion operates.

Sentencing Act 2017 and Correctional Services regime:

• Schedule 3 repeatedly references the Chief Executive and the Minister within the meaning of the Sentencing Act 2017 (Schedule 3 cl 1) and, by operation, makes persons required to perform community service under a shop theft infringement notice “offenders” for the purposes of Division 4 of Part 2 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 (Schedule 3 cl 2). The legislative history notes updates aligning the definitions to the Sentencing Act 2017 (amendment 2017 No 53 s 29). Operationally, the Chief Executive under the Sentencing Act 2017 is assigned the task of allocating a community corrections officer and ensuring the subject is notified of reporting arrangements (Schedule 3 cl 4). Community corrections officers exercise powers consistent with community corrections structures that exist in sentencing and correctional law (Schedule 3 cl 5).

Police Act 1998:

• Section 18 requires the Commissioner of Police to prepare an annual report on the operation and administration of the Act and to incorporate it in the Commissioner’s annual report required under the Police Act 1998 (s 18(2)). The Commissioner’s record‑keeping obligations under s 16 also function within police record‑keeping frameworks.

Police Complaints and Discipline Act 2016:

• The confidentiality exceptions include disclosure “as required for the purposes of the Police Complaints and Discipline Act 2016” (s 17(1)(d)); the legislative history notes amendments in 2016 relating to that Act. This cross‑reference ensures that material can be used for police accountability and disciplinary processes despite the general confidentiality restrictions.

Criminal law and prosecution:

• The Act is an alternative to prosecution for theft in the specified circumstances; it does not alter theft law itself. Section 13 provides that effective consent under the Act removes liability to prosecution for the theft alleged in the notice. Section 14 precludes using failure to issue a notice as an argument in later theft proceedings. Section 15 bars admissions made under the Act from being used in other proceedings except in the narrow cases specified. Therefore, the Act operates as a parallel administrative pathway sitting alongside the criminal law, not as a repeal or alteration of theft offences.

Evidence and civil proceedings:

• The Act’s inadmissibility provisions (s 15) limit the evidential use of admissions in other proceedings, which could have implications for civil actions where admissions might otherwise be relied upon. The Act explicitly preserves admissibility in proceedings under s 12 (breach) and police disciplinary proceedings (s 15(2)).

Regulatory instruments:

• Section 3(3) permits regulations to prescribe the monetary amounts used in the definitions of prescribed amount and prescribed upper limit, but caps those amounts by CPI‑indexed upper bounds based on the default $30 and $150 figures. Regulations therefore can adjust the monetary thresholds but only within a formulaic CPI‑indexed ceiling.

Correctional Services Act 1982:

• Schedule 3’s rolemaking of persons as “offenders” for the purposes of Division 4 of Part 2 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 links performance of community service under the notice to the statutory machinery and standards applying to community service generally under that Act.

Limitations and preservation:

• The Act contains specific cross‑references and explicit limits (for example to police disclosure for prosecutions, police disciplinary action, or police record keeping) to ensure that material arising under the Act can be incorporated into those other statutory processes where necessary (s 17(1)(a), (d)-(e)).

Legislative updates:

• The legislative history at the end of the Act lists amendments that modified definitions and cross‑references (for example, amendments in 2002, 2012, 2016 and 2017). Those amendments updated terminological cross‑links and the identity of executive offices, including the incorporation of the Sentencing Act 2017 office titles into Schedule 3 (see Legislative history entries and Schedule 3 cl 1). Users should consult those amendments when assembling the interacting statutory framework.

The Act’s legislative history, appended to the text, records discrete amendments and the dates on which they commenced. Those amendments chiefly update definitions, cross‑references and administrative titles rather than changing the Act’s core diversion mechanism. Key entries from the provided legislative history:

• 2000, No 73 , Shop Theft (Alternative Enforcement) Act 2000, assented 7 December 2000, commenced 11 November 2001 (Gazette citations provided in the legislative history).
• 2002, No 26 , Criminal Law Consolidation (Offences of Dishonesty) Amendment Act 2002, assented 31 October 2002; Schedule 3 (cl 7) commenced 5 July 2003. The legislative history indicates multiple provisions (for example, definitions in s 3(1) and s 3(2), and s 4(1), s 7, s 13 and s 14) were amended by the 2002 Act (see the “Provisions amended” list).
• 2012, No 52 , Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Act 2012, assented 6 December 2012; Schedule 3 (cl 72) commenced 20 December 2012. The legislative history notes amendments to s 17(1) by this Act, effective 20 December 2012.
• 2016, No 60 , Police Complaints and Discipline Act 2016, assented 8 December 2016; Schedule 1 (cl 33) commenced 4 September 2017. The legislative history notes s 17(1) was further amended by this Act, effective 4 September 2017.
• 2017, No 53 , Statutes Amendment (Sentencing) Act 2017, assented 28 November 2017; parts concerning Schedule 3 (ss 28 & 29) commenced 30 April 2018. Schedule 3’s definition of Chief Executive and Minister were substituted by s 29 of the 2017 Act. The “Provisions amended” section confirms s 3 community corrections officer and Schedule 3 cl 1 definitions were altered by that amendment.

The legislative history also records reprint versions and notes that references in the legislation to other instruments may not be automatically updated. The history lists which provisions were varied and by which amending Act and gives the commencement dates. For example, s 3(1) entries show the amendment of “minor shop theft” by the 2002 Act, with commencement 5 July 2003. The history indicates that s 2 was omitted under the Legislation Revision and Publication Act 2002 with effect 5 July 2003.

Practical implication: amendments have been concentrated on aligning definitions and administrative references with later statutory structures (for example the Sentencing Act 2017 and the Police Complaints and Discipline Act 2016) rather than on rewriting the notice‑based diversion model. Users should rely on the consolidated text provided and note the listed commencement dates for historical versions if older cases or procedures are relevant.

The Act’s text as provided includes no judicial decisions, case citations, or a list of litigation relating to the statute. The legislative text contains no named cases or judicial interpretations. The specified “Legislative history” section summarises statutory amendments but does not record any court decisions. Therefore, based on the source text supplied, there is no litigation history included to indicate how courts have construed the Act’s key provisions such as the meaning of “effective consent”, the scope of inadmissibility in s 15, the threshold for police satisfaction in s 4(1)(e), or the operation of Schedule 3 enforcement powers. The text’s statutory evidentiary presumptions (s 12(2)-(3) and Schedule 3 cl 11) and s 14’s bar on arguing the absence of a notice in later theft proceedings may have been the subject of litigation in practice, but the source document does not record any cases.

If a user needs to know how courts have interpreted the Act’s provisions, or whether judicial review has been pursued against police decisions to issue or not issue notices, that information is not contained within the statute text and would require separate case‑law research in South Australian decisions and rulings. The Act does, however, build in administrative avenues for internal review and oversight (for example, the Commissioner’s annual report requirement in s 18 and confidentiality exceptions for police complaints and discipline in s 17(1)(d)), which would interact with any disciplinary or judicial scrutiny in practice.

The Act’s design includes several technical details and procedural traps that can have material consequences for eligibility, withdrawal rights, evidentiary effect and enforcement. These are concrete operational “gotchas” directly traceable to the text.

Victim consent is dispositive and irrevocable: The victim’s consent is a statutory prerequisite to diversion (s 4(1)(c)). Once given, victim consent “cannot be withdrawn” (s 4(2)). That places a durable constraint on victims and means shop operators who consent may not later alter their decision if they change their minds. Police cannot unilaterally proceed under the Act without victim consent.

Immediate‑consent withdrawal is narrow: An alleged offender who has effectively consented immediately following issue (the on‑the‑spot form for goods at or below the prescribed amount) may withdraw that consent only within 48 hours by personally attending the specified police station and advising in writing, but this right is excluded if the accused has paid the victim the value of the goods (s 8(1)-(3)). If the accused signed and paid at the scene, they likely lose the withdrawal option.

Eligibility exclusions: The scheme only applies to persons aged 18 and over and not to employees of the victim (s 4(1)(b)). Allegations involving juveniles or employee theft are therefore outside the diversion pathway.

Police discretion and sufficiency of evidence requirement: A notice may be issued only where the police officer is satisfied there is “sufficient evidence on which a court could reasonably find the alleged offender guilty” (s 4(1)(e)), and that the theft is not part of a pattern or organised scheme (s 4(1)(d)). Those subjective evaluations place substantial discretion on the issuing officer, which can result in inconsistent application across officers and stations.

Binary outcome on prosecution: If effective consent is given, s 13 states the person “is not liable to prosecution” for the theft alleged. But s 14 prevents later arguing that a notice should have been issued. This prevents defendants from attacking the absence of a diversion option in prosecution, even though the police have broad discretion to decide whether to offer it.

Inadmissibility protections have narrow exceptions: Admissions made as part of consenting are inadmissible in other proceedings unless the person consents (s 15(1)). However, s 15(2) carves out admissibility in breach proceedings under s 12 and disciplinary proceedings against police. If an accused breaches an undertaking, their admission is usable in the breach prosecution.

Records retention and possible use: The Commissioner must retain records for at least five years (s 16). While s 15 restricts use of admissions and s 17 restricts disclosure, there are express exceptions permitting disclosure to the police for record keeping or law enforcement (s 17(1)(a)). That means police will have access to a history of notices and may use that information in subsequent policing decisions, including the s 4(1)(d) “pattern” assessment.

Community service computation and jump effects: Community service for goods above the prescribed amount is calculated at one hour for every $5 or part thereof of the value of the goods (s 6(d)(C)). Because the rate is “or part thereof”, small increases in goods’ value can produce discrete jumps in required hours. The undertaking must be completed within six months (s 6(d)(C)), potentially compressing scheduling.

Time limits and reporting obligations: Many steps are time‑constrained. The accused typically has 48 hours to attend the police station after issue where required (s 5(b)(i), s 6(a)); if community service is required the person must report to a community corrections officer not later than two working days after giving consent (s 6(d)(D)). Failure to meet these deadlines may trigger enforcement steps including prosecution under s 12 or administrative escalation under Schedule 3.

Ministerial discretion on waivers and increases: The Minister may waive or increase community service hours in specified circumstances (Schedule 3 cl 6-9). The Minister’s power to increase hours on default (Schedule 3 cl 9) is an administrative alternative to prosecution but may impose up to 24 additional hours, and this decision is not directly judicially constrained by the Act’s text.

Evidentiary presumptions cut both ways: A properly completed shop theft infringement notice or community corrections certificate is prima facie proof in breach proceedings unless disproved (s 12(2)-(3); Schedule 3 cl 11). That raises evidentiary risk for alleged offenders who signed notices, even where procedural mistakes occurred, unless the defendant mounts rebutting proof.

Confidentiality exceptions: Section 17 broadly prohibits disclosure but lists explicit exceptions. Material can be disclosed to members of the police force for law enforcement and record keeping, to the alleged offender or their legal representative, to the victim in accordance with s 10, for police complaints and discipline or for legal proceedings (s 17(1)(a)-(e)). Those exceptions mean confidentiality is not absolute.

Regulation ceiling on monetary thresholds: Regulations can prescribe amounts for the prescribed amount and prescribed upper limit only up to a CPI‑indexed cap based on the default figures (s 3(3)). This creates a mechanical ceiling on regulatory adjustment rather than unlimited regulatory discretion.

This section sets out a practical compliance checklist for each principal actor in the scheme: police officers and the Commissioner, shop proprietors and their staff, alleged offenders, and community corrections officers and the Chief Executive/Ministerial administration. Each step is grounded in the statutory provisions.

For police officers (issuing and administering notices):

1. Confirm eligibility before issuing a notice: verify the alleged offence qualifies as “minor shop theft” (goods at or below prescribed upper limit) per s 3; confirm the alleged offender is 18 or over and is not an employee of the victim (s 4(1)(b)); obtain and record victim consent (s 4(1)(c)); assess whether there is any reason to suspect the theft is part of a pattern or organised scheme (s 4(1)(d)); ensure there is sufficient evidence that could reasonably found guilt (s 4(1)(e)).
2. Use the correct form: issue the shop theft infringement notice in the form set out in Schedule 1 for goods at or below the prescribed amount, or Schedule 2 for goods above the prescribed amount (s 4(3)). Read Part B aloud at the time of issue (s 4(4)).
3. For goods at or below the prescribed amount: if the accused can immediately apologise, pay for damaged goods (where applicable), sign Part C admitting the offence and undertake to accept a caution, and you as officer confirm Part D, the accused will have effectively consented (s 5(a)). If the accused will not or cannot do that immediately, instruct the accused to attend the specified police station within 48 hours and follow the procedural steps in s 5(b).
4. For goods above the prescribed amount: ensure the accused attends the specified police station within 48 hours, pay the value of goods if damaged (s 6(b)), specify in Part C the apology time and place (unless the victim declines the apology) and the place to report to a community corrections officer, and ensure the accused completes and signs Part C including the undertaking to complete community service calculated at one hour per $5 or part thereof, to be done within six months, and to report to the community corrections officer within two working days (s 6).
5. Provide copies and cautions: after effective consent, provide the accused with a copy of the completed notice and a notice setting out the words of the caution (s 9).
6. Inform the victim: ask whether the victim wants to receive information on how the offence was dealt with, and if so, provide it in accordance with s 10.
7. Forward notices imposing community service promptly to the Chief Executive for assignment of a community corrections officer (Schedule 3 cl 4(1)).
8. Maintain accurate records consistent with Commissioner obligations; ensure entries are suitable to satisfy s 12(2) evidentiary rules where required.

For shop proprietors and victim agents:

1. Understand that consenting to diversion is binding: once you consent to a diversion, you cannot withdraw that consent (s 4(2)).
2. Be prepared to accept payment for damaged goods where applicable; the officer will be required to forward or make that amount available for collection (s 5(a)(ii), s 5(b)(ii), s 6(b)).
3. Decide whether you want information about how the incident was dealt with and, if so, indicate this to police to receive the statutory information (s 10).
4. Avoid consenting if you anticipate needing to withdraw or to pursue prosecution later; the Act makes victim consent irreversible.

For alleged offenders:

1. Check eligibility: ensure you are 18+ and not an employee of the victim (s 4(1)(b)). If not eligible, the Act does not apply.
2. If issued with a notice, consider options promptly: for lower value goods you may be able to apologise immediately and sign on the spot (s 5(a)) or attend within 48 hours (s 5(b)). For higher value goods you must attend within 48 hours and will be required to undertake community service and report to a community corrections officer within two working days (s 6).
3. Understand consequences of signing: signing Part C and completing the other steps constitutes effective consent that removes liability to later prosecution for the theft alleged (s 13) but creates a criminal offence for breach of the undertakings (s 12) with a maximum penalty of $1,250.
4. Withdrawal is limited: if you consent immediately on the spot to a notice for goods valued at or below the prescribed amount, you may withdraw in writing within 48 hours by attending the specified police station unless you have paid the victim (s 8).
5. If community service is required, note the hours calculation (one hour for every $5 or part thereof) and the six‑month completion deadline (s 6(d)(C)). Report to the community corrections officer within two working days after giving consent (s 6(d)(D)).
6. Keep copies of the signed notice and caution statement provided by police (s 9) for your legal records.

For the Chief Executive, community corrections officers and the Minister:

1. On receiving a shop theft infringement notice requiring community service, the Chief Executive must assign a community corrections officer and notify the person in writing of the officer and the first reporting arrangements (Schedule 3 cl 4(1)-(3)).
2. Community corrections officers should be ready to give reasonable directions about reporting, tasks and conduct (Schedule 3 cl 5), and to record attendance and compliance so that certificates evidencing non‑attendance will meet Schedule 3 cl 11 evidentiary standards where required.
3. The Minister should have administrative procedures for handling extension requests (Schedule 3 cl 6), waivers based on infirmity, imprisonment, overlapping requirements or other sufficient reasons (Schedule 3 cl 7), applications to waive unperformed hours where substantial compliance exists (Schedule 3 cl 8), and for assessing defaults that may warrant increasing community service hours (Schedule 3 cl 9). The Minister must notify the Commissioner of Police if a breach of a community service undertaking is established and not trivial (Schedule 3 cl 10(1)).

For the Commissioner of Police and records management:

1. Ensure records of names, allegation details and undertakings are kept for at least five years from the date of effective consent (s 16(1)-(2)).
2. Include an annual report on the operation and administration of the Act in the Commissioner’s annual report by 30 September each year, covering the 12 months to the prior 30 June (s 18).
3. Maintain data‑handling and disclosure protocols consistent with the confidentiality provisions of s 17, including training staff on the exceptions (s 17(1)(a)-(e)) to avoid illegal disclosure risks and the $10,000 penalty for improper disclosure.

General compliance tips:

• Use the statutory forms set out in Schedules 1 and 2 where the text requires those forms (s 4(3)), and document each step required to establish “effective consent” (s 5-6) to ensure evidentiary presumptions under s 12(2) operate where needed.
• For monetary thresholds, track whether regulations have prescribed different amounts and apply the CPI formula in s 3(3) when advising stakeholders about eligibility.
• In any enforcement or breach decision, follow the Schedule 3 pathways (extension, waiver, increase) before initiating prosecution where those administrative remedies are available, mindful that increasing hours precludes prosecution for that breach (Schedule 3 cl 9(2)(b)).

This compliance checklist is derived from the Act’s procedural text (ss 3-18 and Schedule 3) and reflects the division of duties and powers the statute allocates.