I am looking for:
Law Current to: September 1, 2025
Camera-Detected Infringement Notices
Road Rules in Queensland are primarily governed by the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 and, among other pieces of legislation, the Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Road Rules) Regulation 2009.
Chapter 5, Part 7 TORUM provides the legislative framework for camera-detected offences in Queensland. A camera-detected offence is a prescribed offence 1 that is detected by a photographic detection device. Common camera-detected offences include speeding, red light offences, failing to wear a seat belt correctly, or using a mobile phone while driving.
Section 114 TORUM operates such that a registered owner is “taken to have committed the offence … even though the actual offender may have been someone else”: Saunders v Bowman [2008] QCA 112, 3. However, if the registered owner of a vehicle was not the driver at the time of the offence, they may be able to rely on the defences outlined in s 114.
It is clear that the provisions of TORUMA s.114(1) create an offence of strict liability, which may have unjust consequences in a particular circumstance. The strict liability provisions of TORUMA s.114(1) are ameliorated by the provisions of TORUMA s.114(3), but if that defence is not made out, then, as unfair as the outcome appears, it is an inescapable and unavoidable conclusion that a respondent in a case such as this, does not have a defence to the charge of speeding 2.
Responding to an Infringement Notice
If your client receives an Infringement Notice for a camera-detected offence, they will have 28 days to:
- pay the fine, either in full or through an instalment plan;
- elect to dispute the matter in Court; or
- transfer the Infringement Notice to another person or otherwise rely on a defence outlined in s 114 TORUM.
If your client does not respond to the Infringement Notice within 28 days, the fine can be transferred to SPER for collection. Your client will also receive demerit points. Given this, is it important to advise your client of the timeframes to respond to an Infringement Notice, and the consequence of not responding within 28 days.
My client accepts responsibility for the offence
If a client was the driver of the vehicle at the time of the office, there are limited options to challenge the imposition of the fine. If the client seeks advice within 28 days of receiving the notice, we can give them advice about responding to Infringement Notices. The client will also receive demerit points for the infringement.
If your client accepts responsibility for the offence, they can elect to pay the fine, either in full or through a voluntary installment plan. The Infringement Notice will include information about payment options.
My client wants to have the matter heard in Court
If your client does not accept responsibility for the offence, they can elect to have the matter heard in court.
LawRight is unable to help clients to dispute traffic fines in court. However, if your client was not the driver, they may be able to transfer the fine to the actual driver or otherwise rely on the defences outlined in s 114 TORUM without defending the matter in court. You should discuss these options with your client.
If your client wants to have the matter heard in court, you should encourage them to get advice from a lawyer that works in this area.
Your client was not the driver
Infringement Notices for camera-detected offences are initially sent to the registered owner of the vehicle. Your client may receive an Infringement Notice where they were not the driver at the time of the offence, including where the vehicle was stolen or sold before the offence.
It is a defence to a camera-detected offence (other than an unregistered or uninsured offence), for a person to prove that they were not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the offence 3. To rely on this defence, your client will need to provide the appropriate authority 4 with notice that:
- they were not the driver and the name and address of the person in charge of the vehicle at the time the offence happened; or
- the vehicle was stolen before the offence and details of the Queensland Police crime report number; or
- the vehicle was sold/disposed of before the offence and details of the sale/disposal; or
- they did not know and could not, with reasonable diligence, have ascertained the name and address of the person in charge of the vehicle at the time the offence happened.
It is a defence to unregistered or uninsured vehicles offences to show that the vehicle was sold, stolen, or illegally taken prior to the offence Section 114 (3A) TORUM.[/footnotes].
Notice can be provided either by statutory declaration or by using the Government’s Transfer a Fine online service. Notice must be given within 28 days from the date of the Infringement Notice.
Transfer a fine to another driver
If your client wasn’t the driver at the time of the offence and they know who was driving, they can nominate the driver by providing a statutory declaration or by using the Government’s Transfer a Fine online service. This defence is not available for uninsured or unregistered vehicle offences.
An application to transfer a fine to another person must be made within 28 days from the date of the Infringement Notice.
To nominate another driver, your client will need to provide:
- the full name and address of the person that was driving or in charge of the vehicle at the time
- the infringement notice number
- the date and time of the alleged offence
- a description of the offence, for example, ‘Fail to stop at a red light’
The statutory declaration on the back of the Infringement Notice will be partially completed with the relevant details. Your client will need to complete the other relevant details.
The Transfer a Fine online service requests similar information.
A complete list of the information we should include is available here: How to transfer a fine | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government.
The completed statutory declaration can be sent to:
Queensland Revenue Office
GPO Box 1447
BRISBANE QLD 4001
If your client does not have all the necessary details (such as the driver’s date of birth or address) the Authorised Authority may not accept their statutory declaration and your client may be held responsible for the infringements. In these circumstances, you should consider whether the client meets the requirements in ss 114 (3) & (6) TORUM.
If you’re client’s transfer of the fine is successful, the Infringement Notice will be re-issued to the nominated driver. You should speak to your client to confirm if they have any concerns with this process. For example, a victim-survivor may have safety concerns with nominating the responsible driver.
The vehicle was sold, stolen or illegally taken
If your client wasn’t the driver at the time of the offence and the vehicle was sold, stolen or illegally taken prior to the offence, they can notify the Administering Authority by providing a statutory declaration or by using the Government’s Transfer a Fine online service. Notice must be provided within 28 days from the date of the Infringement Notice.
When notifying the Authorised Authority that the vehicle was sold, stolen or illegally taken, your client will need to provide:
- the infringement notice number
- the date and time of the alleged offence
- a description of the offence, for example, ‘Fail to stop at a red light’
If the vehicle was stolen or illegally taken, your client will also need to provide the Queensland Police (QP) number and the either the name of the person that took the vehicle or confirmation that do not know and cannot ascertain the name of the person that took the vehicle.
If the vehicle was sold, your client will also need to provide details of who purchased the vehicle and the time and date it was sold.
The statutory declaration on the back of the Infringement Notice will be partially completed. You client will need to complete the additional information.
The Transfer a Fine online service requests similar information.
A complete list of the information we should include is available here: How to transfer a fine | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government.
The completed statutory declaration can be sent to:
Queensland Revenue Office
GPO Box 1447
BRISBANE QLD 4001
In some instances, you may want to complete an additional statutory declaration to provide more information about the sale or theft of the vehicle.
Unable to identify the driver
It is a defence to a camera-detected offence, other than an unregistered or uninsured offence, for a person to prove that they were not the driver and that they did not know and could not, with reasonable diligence, have ascertained the name and address of the person in charge of the vehicle at the time the offence happened.
For a person to rely on this defence, your client must prove that, at the time of the offence, they:
- exercised reasonable control over the vehicle’s use; and
- had in place a reasonable way of finding out the name and address of the person in charge of the vehicle at any given time having regard to:
(A) the number of drivers; and
(B) the amount and frequency of use; and
(C) whether the vehicle was driven for business or private use.
They will also need to show that, after the offence, they made responsible effects to ascertain the name and address of the driver. These additional requirements, outlined in s 114 (6) TORUM, do not apply if the vehicle was sold, stolen or taken illegally.
Berry v Commissioner of Police [2014] QCA 238 considers these sections in detail. In this case, Ms Berry was issued an infringement notice for speeding in Queensland while she was holidaying interstate. At the time the infringement was issued, Ms Berry’s nephew and his girlfriend were house sitting. Ms Berry assisted the police and made enquiries but was unable to nominate the person in charge. The case considers what is required in a statutory declaration if the registered owner is seeking to rely on ss 114 (3)(b)(ii) and (6) of TORUM.
Ms Berry submitted a statutory declaration stating she had not committed the offence and could not provide details as to who had. The statutory declaration gave further details about the matters outlined in ss 114 (3)(b)(ii) and (6) of TORUM. In the initial hearing, the Magistrate found that the statutory declaration was deficient and noted that the legislation imposes liability on her as the registered owner because she did not prove the car was illegally taken. On appeal it was determined that the Magistrate had erred in finding that she did not exercise reasonable control over the use of the car or maintain a system for identifying the person responsible prior to the commission of the offence.
The Court of Appeal discusses what should be included in a statutory declaration where the other driver is not known (confirmed in paras 47-71):
- information to prove that the person exercised reasonable control over the vehicle’s use
- that they had in place a reasonable way of finding out the name and address of the person in charge of the vehicle at any given time, having regard to the number of drivers, the amount and frequency of use, and whether the vehicle was driven for business or private use.
- proof of a situation after the offence happened, namely that proper search and enquiry was made to ascertain the name and address of the person in charge of the vehicle at the time the offence happened.
In finding that Ms Berry had established a defence under s 114 (3)(b)(ii) and (6) TORUM, the Court of Appeal distinguished the decision in Saunders v Bowman [2008] QCA 112.
In Saunders, Mr Saunders left the house to go to work, and left his keys on the kitchen bench. The extent of his enquiries as to who was driving (it not being him) was this: “I have asked everyone in the house, but no-one has said that they were driving at the time”. In finding that Mr Saunders had not established a defence under s 114, Keane JA stated, “On his evidence, it is not even clear that he troubled to ask each of the people ‘in the house’ directly whether he or she was driving, or what their response was. There was simply no evidence that he exercised any control at all, much less reasonable control, over the use of the vehicle when he was away from home; and the fact that he was not able to say who was driving is itself suggestive of the absence of reasonable control over the vehicle’s use on his part and of the absence of any reasonable system for ascertaining the identity of the driver.”
In contrast, Ms Berry did not permit others to drive her car, had left the vehicle locked in a garage, and had placed her keys in a covered place in her locked home. Ms Berry had in place a reasonable way to find out the names of possible other drivers and undertook that enquiry.
The Infringement Notice has been transferred to SPER
A review of a client’s SPER debt schedule may reveal multiple Infringement Notices issued for camera detected offences. These Infringement Notices may have been issued many years ago.
A client’s options will depend on the individual circumstances of their matter. If your client was the driver at the time of the offence, there are limited options to challenge the fine. However, you may want to consider your client’s options to resolve a SPER debt generally, including instalment plans and Work and Development Orders.
If your client was not the driver, you should consider if they can rely on the defences outlined in s 114 TORUM. If your client would like to rely on these defences, they will first need to apply to SPER under s 56 of the State Penalties Enforcement Act 1999 to have the enforcement order/infringement notice cancelled.
Whether the client can rely on these sections to have the notices withdrawn and re-issued depends on the specific facts of the matter. We should seek detailed instructions and consider these against the legislation to provide the client with considered advice before proceeding.
Section 56 SPE Act: Applications for cancellation of enforcement orders
You can apply to SPER to cancel an enforcement order if:
- the person did not receive—
(i) the infringement notice; or
(ii) any reminder notice the relevant administering authority sent to the person about the infringement notice; or
(iii) the enforcement order; - the person received a notice or order mentioned after the time allowed for taking action stated in the notice or order;
- the person was prevented by accident or illness or for another similar reason from taking action in relation to the infringement notice or enforcement order;
- the person is electing to have the matter of the offence to which the relevant enforcement order relates decided in a Magistrates Court.
The application must be made within the earlier of the following—
- 14 days after the debtor becomes aware of the existence of the order;
- 6 months after the issue of the relevant enforcement order.
However, SPER may accept an application outside these timeframes if the registrar is satisfied the applicant has reasonable grounds for the delay. A person can usually only make one application for each enforcement order.
If the application is successful, the enforcement order will be cancelled and sent back to the issuing authority to be re-issued.
In practice, SPER will usually agree to cancel the enforcement order where the debtor has experienced significant financial and personal hardship, and where the debtor is seeking to challenge the underlying fine. If the application is within the state timeframes, we can apply for a withdrawal online. If the application is outside these timeframes or if there are multiple infringements, you may want to contact SPER in writing to request the withdrawal and provide additional supporting material.
Before submitting a 56 application, you should speak with your client about:
1. Updating their address with the Department of Transport and Main Roads to ensure they receive the re-issued infringement notices.
Your client’s address can be updated online. Your client’s may also want to authorise the Department to send notices by email.
2. Their options to respond to the re-issued infringement notices. You should only submit a s 56 application where the client is seeking to respond to the re-issued Infringement Notice/s by paying the fine, applying for an instalment plan, or relying on a defence in s 114 TORUM.
3. It is essential that your client can receive the re-issued infringement notices. If the notices are re-issued and your client does not respond within 28 days, the notices will be transferred to SPER for collection. Importantly, after the 28 days your client will not be able to rely on the defences in s 114 TORUM.
You may also want to provide a completed statutory declaration to the administering authority in anticipation of the infringement notices being re-issued. In Lambert v Queensland Police Service, District Court Judge Morzone QC found that a complaint statutory declaration was “given within the required time” required by s 114(4) and (5) of the Act where it was provided prior to the cancellation of an enforcement order but before the issue of a fresh infringement notice and remained in the possession of the administering authority during the 28 day period.
Camera-detected infringements are eligible under SPER’s Domestic and Family Violence process.
If your client has been impacted by domestic violence, you should consider whether they would prefer to resolve the fines through this process.
