The following is a brief article providing evidence that an infringement notice issued under the Infringements Act 2006 VIC is a fine, and as currently issued by Civic Compliance Victoria (and others) is illegal and void.
Definitions
Section 3 of the Infringements Act 2006 VIC [1] states:
fine means an infringement penalty and any prescribed costs and includes any fee payable under section 81;
infringement penalty means the amount stated in an
infringement notice as payable in respect of the infringement offence to
which the notice relates;
infringement notice means a notice in respect of an infringement offence served or to be served in accordance with Part 2;
infringement offence means an offence which may be the subject of an infringement notice under-
(a) any Act or statutory rule; or
(b) any local law; or
(ba) a by-law made under section 171 of the Water Act 1989 or a by-law made under a prescribed Act; or
(c) any Commonwealth Act or any Act of another State or Territory or any subordinate instrument under
such an Act that applies as a law of Victoria; infringement offender
means a person who has been arrested under one or more infringement
warrants...
Infringement notice is a fine
Applying logical relationships between these terms a fine is an
infringement penalty, and an infringement penalty is a demand for
payment contained on an infringement notice (in relation to
an infringement offence). In other words, one may interpret this as
saying that an infringement notice is a fine.
When the State Attorney-General, Robert Clark was asked if an
infringement notice sent by Civic Compliance Victoria was a fine, he
responded by stating, "An infringement notice generated and posted
by Civic Compliance Victoria (CCV) is a fine". Hence, the
Attorney-General, a Minister of the Crown, has stated that an
infringement notice (sent by CCV) is a fine. [2]
Natural justice and your birth rights
It is vital that every Victorian (and all people of the Commonwealth)
are aware that fines can only be ordered by a constitutionally valid
court as defined by the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 -
following a lawful conviction. This procedural requirement is well
documented in the Imperial Acts Application Act 1980 VIC [3] which
states:
[1688] I William and Mary Sess. II (Bill of Rights) c. II
...
12. And several grants and promises made of fines and forfeitures,
before any conviction or judgement against the persons, upon whom the
same were to be levied.
All which are utterly and directly contrary to the known laws and statutes, and freedom of this realm:
...
12. That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction, are illegal and void.
All people of the Commonwealth have the right to due process, without
it then they are denied natural justice. This has been the case in the
British realm since 1215 as stated in Clause 39 of the Magna Carta [4]
(note that this is a translation from the original copy):
39. Guarantee of judgment by one’s peers and of proceedings according
to the “law of the land.” No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or
disseised, or outlawed, or banished, or any ways destroyed, nor will we
pass upon him, nor will we send upon him, unless by the lawful judgment
of his peers, or by the law of the land.
This doctrine is enshrined in Magna Carta 1297, Petition of Right 1627
and Habaes Corpus 1640 as published in the Imperial Acts Application Act
1980 VIC [3]:
Division 3-Justice and liberty
[1297] 25 Edward I (Magna Carta) c. XXIX
No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his
freehold, or liberties or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or any
other wise destroyed; nor will we pass upon him, nor condemn him,
but by lawful judgement of his peers, or by the law of the land. We will
sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either justice or
right.
...
[1627] 3 Charles I (Petition of Right) c. I
...
3. And where also by the statute called, The great charter of the
liberties of England, it is declared and enacted, That no freeman may be
taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his freehold or liberties
or his free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or in manner destroyed,
but by the lawful judgement of his peers, or by the law of the land.
...
Division 2-Habeas corpus [1640] 16 Charles I c. X
An Act for the regulating of the privy council, and for taking away the
court commonly called the star-chamber. Whereas by the great charter
many times confirmed in parliament, it is enacted, That no freeman shall
be taken or imprisoned, or disseised of his freehold or liberties or
free customs, or be outlawed or exiled or otherwise destroyed, and that
the King will not pass upon him, or condemn him; but by lawful judgement
of his peers, or by the law of the land...
Quite simply, as presented, any person or entity issuing fines before a
lawful conviction is breaking the law. It appears that if you receive
an infringement notice then you are a victim of crime.
Two questions to ask after receiving your next notice
Next time you receive an infringement notice from Civic Compliance
Victoria, you are invited to contact CCV and ask two very simple
questions:
- What is an infringement notice? (Is it a fine?)
- Who sent the infringement notice? (What is their ABN/ACN?)
The former question will provide admission (confession) that the
infringement notice is a fine (in addition to the admission provided by
the Attorney-General). The latter question will provide evidence of who
you are actually dealing with, as Civic Compliance Victoria is merely a
trade mark; no entity of that name exists.
References
- Infringements Act 2006 VIC, Section 3 (austlii.edu.au)
- Letter from Attorney-General of Victoria, 29 August 2011 (exfacie.com)
- Imperial Acts Application Act 1980 VIC, Section 8 (austlii.edu.au)
- 1215: Magna Carta (libertyfund.org)
No comments:
Post a Comment