Home
The Issue
Facts about speedo error
Evidence about what the Government knows
Arguments used to defend low tolerance speed limits
Defenses against low tolerance fines
Library of useful documents
Useful links
Discussion Forum
Contract details
Disclaimer

Defences

There are a number of actions you can take to defend yourself.

The following is a list of avenues you might consider. Please note that many of these arguments have not yet been tested in court or provide a challenge to existing law. They are provided as reasonable arguments only for which we believe there is some legal and/or technical support:

So you want to take it further! So you want to take it further!
So you want to take it further! Accept the fine on the condition that proof of claim can be provided
Object to the fine. Object to the fine
Legislative Framework for the Alleged Offence Legislative Framework for the Alleged Offence
Does the National Measurement Act 1960 apply? Does the National Measurement Act 1960 apply?
Is the speedometer accuracy legislated?</span> Is the speedometer accuracy legislated?
Defence Of Honest And Reasonable Mistake Defence of Honest & Reasonable Mistake
Challenge to the accuracy of a speed detection device Challenge to the accuracy of a speed detection device
Need some help? Need some help?

Consider this

Those who would see this as an approach to thwart infringement notices and fines as a somehow morally wrong course of action, are asked to consider the following points:

  1. All law enforcement agencies in the State of Victoria must comply with all of the laws of the Commonwealth.

  2. The Commonwealth Constitution states in Covering Clause 5, ‘This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the courts, judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State.’

  3. Section 109 of the Commonwealth Constitution says, ‘When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.’

  4. The Commonwealth Act for regulating and enforcing compliance with respect to legal metrology is the National Measurements Act 1960 (Cwth).

  5. Legal metrology is defined as taking measurements for ‘any legal purpose’.

  6. To date, it appears that speed cameras and radars do not conform to the National Measurements Act 1960 (Section 10) in respect of calibration, testing or pattern approval.

  7. Victoria Police refer to Section 83 of the Road Safety Act 1986 (Vic) when questioned about testing and calibration of the speed detection devices. The Section refers to the device being tested or sealed in the prescribed manner. The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology is the testing body in respect of these devices for Victoria Police. It appears that RMIT are not an accredited testing authority in accordance with the National Measurements Act 1960 (Cwth).

  8. If the Victoria Police is acting within the law in regard to their operation of speed cameras and radars, they should be able to easily verify their claim and produce documentary evidence to substantiate that claim.