From Sydney Criminal Lawyers, December 2022
In a statement a week prior to the Redfern Legal Centre challenge to COVID fines issued by NSW police taking place, acting principal solicitor Sam Lee said, the case was about more than just two fines, rather it spoke to “the need to properly adhere to the rule of law, even during a pandemic”.
On Tuesday this week, Lee was proven correct, as the NSW Supreme Court agreed that COVID fines issued to the plaintiffs involved in the court challenge were invalid because they failed to meet the legal requirements set out in the Fines Act 1996 (NSW).
The case originally involved three plaintiffs: Pank, Beame and Els. However, on the day the administrative law case was filed with the court, Revenue NSW conceded that Pank’s fine for allegedly failing to comply with a public health order was problematic and withdrew it.
The Supreme Court then went on to agree with the argument put by RLC this week, which was the Beame and Els fines were invalid as the penalty notices issued did not have enough details of the alleged offence, as is required under the legislation governing the issuing of fines in this state.
This finding further resulted in Revenue NSW cancelling more than 33,000 other COVID fines issued under similar such circumstances across the state over 2020 and 2021, which amounted to close to $30 million worth of infringement notices.
Half of all COVID fines cancelled
After the 29 November ruling was handed down, Revenue NSW released a statement announcing that as the Commissioner of Fines Administration was unable to individually review all the fines issued in a similar manner to those cancelled by the court, he was withdrawing all of them.
These were those notices marked “fail to comply with noticed direction in relation section 7/8/9 – COVID-19” for individuals, which carried a $1,000 penalty, as well as those falling under the same category that were issued to companies and involved a $55,000 fine.
“This decision does not mean the offences were not committed,” the statement maintains.
“A total of 33,121 fines will be withdrawn, which is around half of the total number of 62,138 COVID-19 related fines issued,” it continues. “The remaining 29,017 COVID-19 fines will still be required to be paid if not already resolved. They are not affected by this decision.”
Revenue NSW further explained that in the cases where fines were withdrawn, any resulting drivers licence suspensions or garnishee activity would be brought to a halt. And those who have already made a payment in relation to a fine should contact the agency for a refund.
Prejudicial from the onset
Lee further outlined in her initial statement before the case was heard that there is ample evidence showing that NSW police was handing out these draconian fines during the pandemic period with a focus on issuing them to “those living in low socioeconomic areas of NSW”.
The Redfern Legal Centre stated after the court decided in its favour that not only were these fines having a “crippling impact, especially for those experiencing financial disadvantage”, but as they did not specify what offence had been committed, there was no way of challenging them.
“What an incredible day for the people,” remarked Lee on Tuesday after the ruling was handed down. “Today justice has been granted to three people who took on the NSW government regarding the validity of their COVID fines and won.”
www.cairnsnews.org 
Addendum to my previous post: –
I think it may have been Justice Latham.
LikeLike
Notwithstanding all the judges rantings, NONE of these fines were lawful because none were preceded with a federally required health notice, signed by an official health officer, to a named recipient (cops are not health officers), to EACH AND EVERY single man, woman, and child, suspected of being in contact with some sort of transmittable pathogen
I just cannot remember the name of the high court justice who said: –
‘ the federal government has no authority to legislate on matters of quarrantine, and what the federal government cannot do, the state governments cannot do’
He preceded that with the comment: =
‘Most, if not all health matters, fall under the heading of quarrantine’.
LikeLike
Don’t forget the AFP maggots in Canberra who used directed-energy weapons to cause microwave injuries to hundreds of peaceful protesters over the 18-20 Feb 2022 long weekend.
It was well documented at the time and following days, no escaping it and easy to find victim photo’s and their agony stories.
Also their desperate cloud seeding efforts overhead on those same days, unsuccessful in drenching the crowd, but well recorded at FlightRadar for anyone that cares to look.
We will never forget that courageous effort by a million Aussies at the largest rally in our country’s history and the cowardly bastards who tried, but failed to crush it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What to say about the Judiciary and their Courts? At any point in time after this nefarious program kicked off in 2020, and the gov was encouraging employers to mandate their employees to take an untested toxin to keep their job; and the police were encouraged to issue fines for watching sunsets or whatever, they could have spoken out. They could have sided with ‘We the People’. But they didn’t. After all the damages done, they now make concessions the police got it wrong on issuing fines. 3 years too late. But I suppose better late than never.
The Judiciary is playing on the other team, they secretly want you dead or enslaved and out of their wigs. That’s not to say their are some legal professionals doing the right thing, but at the highest levels I don’t see it.
LikeLike
tonyryan43 said – “All of this suggests way too many executions than can be managed conventionally, so the alternative will be mass hangings.”
You could take a leaf out of the American FEMA’s playbook and just buy in 500 guillotines.
That should get some heads spinning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Apologies. A miscalculation, 100 bodies per 20 minutes totalling 300 bodies per hour, which equals 2400 bods per 8 hour shift, which is 7200 per day. Who said the Public Service can’t be efficient?
LikeLike
As not one of those offences is backed by science, one day there will be a whole host of refunds. After that, will come the prosecutions of everyone involved in the faux suspension of the Australian Constitution, which was unlawful. Then prosecution of those who breached the Privacy Act, The Police Offences Act, and the Nuremberg Code. Then will come the doctors and nurses who jabbed.
All of this suggests way too many executions than can be managed conventionally, so the alternative will be mass hangings. Perhaps some kind of revolving cylindrical scaffold might work, with a platform on one side and noose at each linear metre. and in which each third revolution would stretch the necks of one hundred criminals. That would be 400 executions per 20 minutes, totalling 1200 bodies an hour. I will commence designing one immediately.
LikeLiked by 1 person