After being on the receiving end of a particularly galling event, and having some time on my hands, I decided to buck the system.
I Am Not a Lawyer
And this is not legal advice.
What it is, is an account of how I went about it, the hurdles I encountered, and what I learned along the way. At my third Court appearance I won, but my direct costs exceeded the fine, even when representing myself. Much of that direct cost was largely unnecessary as it turned out, so hopefully you can benefit from what I learned and do things more efficiently. Had I been quicker on my feet, I may have been able to have costs awarded, but missed the opportunity, since I was just relieved to get it behind me by that stage.
One thing I can promise you – the journey will be somewhat stressful at times, and unless you have a strong case, you’ll likely lose.
Why Would You Bother?
Pride? The need to conserve points on your license? Only you can answer that. What I can say is that if you win, it will have cost the Traffic Office far more in prosecuting their case than your own costs amount to. If you lose, they will likely try to recoup their costs from you, and they will not be backward in spending money to achieve a win if they think they have a winning hand.
The Playing Field is Far from Level
My account is based on legislation and technology as it applied in 2018. The legislation that the Police rely on for the prosecution is spelled out on the Infringement Notice – namely the State Penalties Enforcement Act 1999 (SPER) and the Transport Operations (Road Use Management Act) 1995 (TORUM).
In my case, a combined red light and speed camera was involved, and the Transport Operations Act specifically excludes the Australian Standard AS 2898 for Radar Speed Detection as being applicable for these devices, despite the fact that many, if not all, of these devices incorporate radar technology to derive the primary speed measurement. More on this later.
Also note that the above Australian Standard is, I believe, currently being updated by Standards Australia (to CS-068?). Radar is quite accurate when operated within its design parameters, so you will need to be very careful if planning to challenge a radar reading based purely on technical arguments. The legislation does, however, acknowledge the validity of the Australian Standard in the case of mobile radars as opposed to fixed camera installations.
If no current Standard is in force, the legislation points to the manufacturer’s operating manual as the accepted authority. Unfortunately these manuals are kept a closely guarded secret within Queensland and by the Manufacturers, and will require the use of a Summons/Subpoena to get hold of them. Even then, restrictions will probably be imposed on their access.
As far as I can ascertain, the basis for excluding fixed camera types is because they employ a secondary evidentiary system involving road markings and 2 photos, but the secondary system is quite inaccurate by my assessment.
Finally, be aware that SPER and TORUM are not the only pieces of Legislation that may be applicable. In my case, I was able to fall back on the provisions of Section 25 of the Criminal Code Act 1899, which states:
25 Extraordinary emergencies
s.25 Queensland Criminal Code Act 1999
Subject to the express provisions of this Code relating to acts done upon compulsion or provocation or in self-defence, a person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission done or made under such circumstances of sudden or extraordinary emergency that an ordinary person possessing ordinary power of self-control could not reasonably be expected to act otherwise.
Don’t Expect Any Co-operation
In fact, quite the reverse. In my experience, your challenge will not be taken seriously until the first Court date approaches, and only if you have cleared the hidden hurdles in the fine print. My efforts to get hold of evidence supporting my case were met with denials and false information right up to the first Court appearance. Requests for a Brief of Evidence were ignored, and handed over only at my second Court Appearance in front of the Magistrate, possibly with the intention of leaving no time for preparation of a case. If you seek technical data relating to the equipment used, subpoenas will likely be the only avenue in my experience.
fight the man 