Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Land Transport Act 1998

Proceedings enforcing responsibilities - Evidence

141A: Evidence of ongoing capability of automated infringement system

You could also call this:

“Proving that automatic road rule cameras work correctly”

When someone is accused of breaking a road rule that was detected by an automated system, there’s a special way to prove the system was working correctly. The Agency can give a signed certificate that shows the system was working properly. This certificate proves three important things:

  1. The system had a quality check in the last 12 months.
  2. The system was checking the right things.
  3. The system was using people’s information correctly and following privacy rules.

For the certificate to be valid, it needs to be current when the alleged offence happened. It can’t be older than 12 months from when the offence supposedly took place.

If someone wants to challenge this certificate, they can ask the court to look at other evidence instead. They need to do this at least 14 days before the court hearing. The court will only do this if there’s a good reason.

This rule helps make sure that the automated systems used to catch people breaking road rules are working properly and fairly.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=LMS943064.

Previous

141: Provisions relating to infringement fees, or

"Rules about paying fines for breaking road rules"

Next

142: Evidence of driver history relating to infringement fees, or

"How your driving fines and small offences can be used as proof in court"

Part 10 Proceedings enforcing responsibilities
Evidence

141AEvidence of ongoing capability of automated infringement system

  1. In proceedings relating to an infringement offence verified by an automated infringement system, the production of a certificate (or a document purporting to be a copy of the certificate) purporting to be signed by a person authorised for the purpose by the Agency, as to the capability of the automated infringement system referred to in the certificate, is, in the absence of proof to the contrary, sufficient proof that—

  2. the system had, within the preceding 12 months, undergone a quality assurance process as required by section 139AAC; and
    1. the system was verifying the matters set out in section 139AAA(1); and
      1. the system was being operated in a way that collects, holds, uses, and discloses personal information in accordance with the Privacy Act 2020.

        1. A certificate under subsection (1)—

        2. must be, or have been, current on the date of the alleged offence; and
          1. is not valid if it was given more than 12 months before the date of the alleged offence.

            1. In any proceedings where a certificate has been produced under this section, the court may, on application made not less than 14 days before the hearing of the charge concerned, and if satisfied that there is good cause to do so, set aside the certificate and require the capability of the automated infringement system to be established by evidence other than the certificate.

            Notes
            • Section 141A: inserted, on , by section 28 of the Land Transport (Road Safety) Amendment Act 2023 (2023 No 62).