Originally Posted by jezzamcbezza

From: http://trafficlaw.com.au/speeding.fines.html

Q. How does the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cwth) help to fight a speeding offence in Victoria?

It does not provide any help at all. This legislation ("NMA") has absolutely no impact whatsoever on the detection or prosecution of speeding offences in Victoria. Over the past 30 years numerous courts have held that evidence obtained from speed measuring devices is admissible as evidence in court despite the National Measurement Act and the National Measurement Regulations. The NMA legislation does not require speed measuring devices to be certified and generally does not affect the admissibility of evidence obtained from any speed measuring device. About 5 years ago I represented a client (Ken Harris) who instructed me to run the NMA argument. Mr Harris was convicted and he subsequently lost his County Court appeal. Although the NMA argument has been accepted on a couple of occasions, each of those rulings has been overturned by higher appeal courts. You will have to take your case to the High Court to overrule the current position. Below are links to some of the superior court decisions that have thrown-out this argument. A few home-grown speeding fine activists are still advising people to use this "defence", so the list of losing cases is likely to grow as time goes by. They believe the courts are mis-interpreting the legislation. The courts' duty is to interpret the legislation made by parliament, and if the courts' interpetation is not what parliament intended, then you can expect parliament to make appropriate amendments. Parliament has not made any amendments to change the court's interpretation of this legislation. In my opinion, there are many easier ways to win a speeding case than to rely on the NMA, although speeding fine activists can't think of any.

Re: Appeal of White [1987] District Court NSW
Hooper v. Marshall [1992] TASSC B50
Allan v. Broome [2003] TASSC 38
JENKINS v WMC RESOURCES LTD [1999] WASCA 171
Pearce v Dennis [1997] QCA 239
Crosthwaite v Loader [1995] QSC 42
Borody v Smith Ors [2002] NSWSC 1242
Brooks v. Parente (1989) Supreme Court of Vic. Nathan J. Unreported.
Radalj v. Taylor (1997) 25 MVR 11 (SCWA)
Rumsely v. Taylor (1997) 26 MVR 563 (SCWA)
In the Appeal of Lloyd (1994) 20 MVR 408 (NSW)

Originally Posted by rubberbudgie

Going to court and saying that it is physically impossible as your only defence and not having any evidence to introduce a "reasonable doubt" is asking to have it thrown out. Saying it's not physically possible and then presenting the court with evidence is a whole different matter entirely.

Originally Posted by Kato

Have you actually been before a judge with this 'toolkit' or has it never reached that far?

Originally Posted by rubberbudgie

You're making a lot of assumptions with your statements there. I am more than happy to take responsibility for my own actions, the other night when I got a ticket for doing 114 in a 90 zone I know for a fact I was doing 100 on the dot because the chick I had in the car with me was asking how fast the car got to 100 kph so we tested it and she had the laptop and I was watching 2 speedos so to say I was doing 114 is a bit of a fairy tale (and yes my speedo has been calibrated recently). Now I am more than happy to cop 10-12 kph over the limit and get 1 point on my licence but $300 and 3 points is a joke.

Originally Posted by wrx oh oh

My opinion fwiiw
Those website arguments are the same as 'the right to bear arms' and 'local governments are not recognized in the constitution'.
This will get you nowhere in any Australian court of law.
For example, remember the guy who camped up a tree to stop the City of Gosnells cutting it down? He lost, the tree is down. And many people on here would own or be a tenant of a strata title property, these have by-laws which are upheld by the courts even though 'strata titles are not recognized in the constitution'.

Originally Posted by wrx oh oh

My opinion fwiiw
Those website arguments are the same as 'the right to bear arms' and 'local governments are not recognized in the constitution'.
This will get you nowhere in any Australian court of law.
For example, remember the guy who camped up a tree to stop the City of Gosnells cutting it down? He lost, the tree is down. And many people on here would own or be a tenant of a strata title property, these have by-laws which are upheld by the courts even though 'strata titles are not recognized in the constitution'.

Originally Posted by Giddyup

I just HAVE to see how this goes.