Question 1

The Greater Wild Finch Protection Act 2014 (Cth) (‘the Act’) is enacted by the
Commonwealth Parliament and receives assent from the Commonwealth Governor-General
on 24 October 2014. The Act is silent as to its date of commencement.
The relevant provisions of the Act are as follows:
Long Title
An Act to protect the Greater Wild Finch by protecting the breeding habitat of the
bird in the area surrounding still water sources throughout Australia.
1 Objects
The objects of this Act are to:
(a) protect the Greater Wild Finch, which is a threatened species that is rapidly
disappearing throughout Australia; and
(b) give the National Parks Service in each state and territory the power to declare
protected breeding zones for the Greater Wild Finch.
…
10 Power of NPS Officer to declare protected breeding zone
(1) Where an Officer of the National Parks Service (NPS) in the relevant state or
territory determines that a particular lake, pond, reservoir or other similar water
source is a significant breeding area for the Greater Wild Finch, the officer must
declare an area within 100 metres of the water source to be a ‘protected breeding
zone’ (‘the declaration’).
(2) The declaration of a protected breeding zone continues in force for 2 months from
the date on which the declaration is made.
(3) No person is permitted access to a ‘protected breeding zone’ for any purpose
while the declaration is in force.
Penalty for breach of subsection (3) is 50 penalty units.
Peter is an Officer of the National Parks Service in Queensland. He knows that every year a
large flock of Greater Wild Finches comes to breed in the area surrounding a dam on a local
property owned by Richard. Peter wants to declare the area a ‘protected breeding zone’ under
s 10 of the Act as soon as possible. He comes to you seeking advice on his powers and
obligations under the Act.

Question 2

Question 2

Returning from a family holiday, James Leadfoot and his wife Clarissa were in a car driving
on the Hume Highway towards Sydney. It is unclear on the facts which one of them was
driving the car. The car passed a speed camera, which took a photograph of the car travelling
at 142 km / hr in a 100 km / hr zone.

James Leadfoot is the registered owner of the car. He receives a notification from the Roads
and Traffic Authority in the mail stating that his licence is to be suspended for a period of 6
months. The notification states that the suspension for a period of ‘at least 6 months is
required by s 18(1)(a) of the Traffic Act 1955 (NSW)’.
Section 18 of the Traffic Act 1955 (NSW) provides that:

18 Power of court to cancel, suspend or vary licences and permits

(1) Where a court convicts a person of, or is satisfied that a person is guilty of, an
offence against this Act or of any other offence in connection with the driving of a
motor vehicle, the court —
(a) in the case of an offence of driving a motor vehicle at a speed of –
(i) 140 kilometres per hour or more; or
(ii) 30 kilometres per hour or more in excess of that permitted –
must suspend all driver licences and permits held by that person for the period
specified in Column 2 of Schedule 3 ascertained by reference to the speed at which
the vehicle was driven as specified in Column 1 of that Schedule;…
...
(4) Subsection (1) does not apply to an offence to which section 88 applies unless the
court is satisfied that the person convicted or found guilty of the offence was the
actual driver of the motor vehicle at the time of the offence.
Section 18 is in Part 2 of the Traffic Act 1955 (NSW) which is headed ‘Licensing of Drivers’.

Column 1 of Schedule 3 to the Act relevantly states that ‘…where the vehicle exceeds the
speed limit by 35 kms per hour or more, the minimum period of suspension of licence is 6
months.’

Section 1 of the Traffic Act 1955 (NSW) states that:

1 Objects
The objects of this Act are to:
(1) provide for safe, efficient and equitable road use; and
(2) set out the general obligations of road users in relation to responsible road use;
and
(3) ensure that people who are, or who become, unsuited to drive due to inappropriate
road use are not permitted to drive on highways.

In addition, s 88 of the Act, to which s 18(4) refers, states:

88 Offences detected by a speed camera

(1) If —
(a) a prescribed offence occurs; and
(b) the offence is detected by a speed camera …
the person who at the time the offence occurs is the owner of the motor vehicle
involved in the offence is guilty of an offence as if that person were the driver of the
motor vehicle…
...
(3) In this section, ‘owner’ means the person in whose name the motor vehicle is
registered at the time of the offence ...
...
(5) To avoid any doubt about the operation of subsection (1), the owner of a motor
vehicle who, by reason of subsection (1), is taken to be guilty of an offence is liable to
the same penalties and consequences (such as the imposition of demerit points) to
which he or she would have been liable if he or she had been the actual driver of the
motor vehicle at the time the offence occurred.
James challenges the suspension of his licence, arguing that s 18(4) requires the court to be
satisfied that he was the ‘actual driver’ of the car at the time of the offence. He argues that
due to the fact that the car was photographed by a speed camera, the prosecution cannot
prove that he was the actual driver of the car at the time of the offence. This interpretation of
s 18(4) Traffic Act 1955 (NSW) could be seen to conflict with the application of s 88, which
says that the owner of a motor vehicle will be ‘taken to be guilty of an offence’ by virtue of s
88(1).

Applying the rules of statutory interpretation, in particular, the ‘purposive approach’

to construction explained by the High Court in Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian
Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28, discuss the interpretation of the inter-
relationship between sections 18(4) and 88 of the Traffic Act 1955 (NSW), explaining
which of the two possible constructions you prefer and why.