Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey,

I'm sure I found a link ages ago, it might have been on the justice website but that website has been re-structured recently.

Does anyone have a document that specifies what the hoon laws are?

I understand the obvious, if your over the speed limit by 45km/h, loss of control of vehicle in some circumstances, drag racing, excessive noise or wheel spin...

Just trying to confirm some rumors about the law.

Regards,

Gareth

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/250136-anti-hoon-hoon-laws-legislation/
Share on other sites

I have a brilliant idea, don't be a cock and you won't need them :)

seriously though, maybe pop down to a cop shop and ask for a copy?

Lol at the first comment, I don't need 'em, I just want to confirm a rumour, the rumour was that police can search your vehicle if they believe you have illegal performance modifications, which is a very open law, I don't believe it exists but wanted to confirm.

Obviously there are similar laws but that's if you have a previous drug offence or similar, or they believe you have a radar detecting device or..

No warrant only suspicion of a crime/offence is required for a valid vehicle search.

So basically any excuse will do.

Under which act? According to http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/your.rights.html the police do not have a general right to search your vehicle, inspect yes, but not to rip the vehicle apart to check for something unless they have a good reason for the suspicion, eg. previous drug conviction of any kind et cetera.

The smell of cannabis or when approaching the vehicle i noticed blah blah reaching under the seat ect,

To check for aftermarket ecu is an emmissions issue so they can also do that....I could go on but i'd hope you have the general idea by now.

Edited by madbung

You'd probably be better seaching common law than some 3rd party traffic law site.

Look under powers of search and seizure.

Heres a breif summary.

Skip to the bold print if you don't want to read the entire txt

SEARCH & SEIZURE

Specific powers of entry, arrest, search and seizure under DFDA include inter alia:

s 91 (Power to Enter to make Arrest)

s 92 (Use of Force)

subject to no greater indignity than necessary – no automatic handcuffs!

ss 101V-W (Search and Seizure Powers)

Key Concept: Belief on Reasonable Grounds

Who must have this belief?

Role of investigating and authorized officer?

SEARCH & SEIZURE

George v Rockett (1990) 170 CLR 104

The prescription of conditions which must be fulfilled before a warrant is issued reflect the legislature's concern to protect these interests. It is necessary to insist on strict compliance with these conditions: at 111

Proving the existence of reasonable grounds

[The Act] imposes a duty on the magistrate to satisfy himself or herself that the conditions for the issue of the warrant are satisfied. That is, it must appear to the magistrate that there are reasonable grounds for the police entertaining the relevant suspicion and belief. This does not mean that the justice must also entertain the relevant suspicion and belief. Such a requirement was described by the court as "excessive": at 112.

SEARCH & SEIZURE

George v Rockett (1990) 170 CLR 104

Endorsed Parker v. Churchill (1985) 63 ALR 326 at 333, per Burchett J:

"The duty, which the justice of the peace [authorized officer under DFDA] must perform in respect of an information, is not some quaint ritual of the law, requiring a perfunctory scanning of the right formal phrases, perceived but not considered, and followed by simply an inevitable signature. What is required by the law is that the justice of the peace should stand between the police and the citizen, to give real attention to the question whether the information proffered by the police does justify the intrusion they desire to make into the privacy of the citizen and the inviolate security of his personal and business affairs.”

SEARCH & SEIZURE

George v Rockett (1990) 170 CLR 104

“…suspicion and belief are different states of mind … Suspicion is a state of conjecture or surmise where proof is lacking. The facts which can reasonably ground a suspicion may be quite insufficient reasonably to ground a belief, yet some factual basis for the suspicion must be shown. The objective circumstances sufficient to show a reason to believe something need to point more clearly to the subject matter of the belief, but that is not to say that the objective circumstances must establish on the balance of probabilities that the subject matter in fact occurred or exists. Belief is the inclination of the mind towards assenting to, rather than rejecting, a proposition and the grounds which can reasonably induce that inclination of the mind may, depending on the circumstances, leave something to surmise and conjecture”: at 115-116.

SEARCH & SEIZURE

R v Rondo [2001] NSWCCA 540, per Spigelman CJ, Simpson J, and Smart AJ [para 51]

(a) A reasonable suspicion involves less than a reasonable belief but more than a possibility. There must be something which would create in the mind of a reasonable person an apprehension or fear of one of the state of affairs covered by s 357E [stop and search power]. A reason to suspect that a fact exists is more than a reason to consider or look into the possibility of its existence.

(b) Reasonable suspicion is not arbitrary. Some factual basis for the suspicion must be shown. A suspicion may be based on hearsay material or materials which may be inadmissible in evidence. The materials must have some probative value.

© What is important is the information in the mind of the police officer stopping the person or the vehicle or making the arrest at the time he did so. Having ascertained that information the question is whether that information afforded reasonable grounds for the suspicion which the police officer formed. In answering that question regard must be had to the source of the information and its content, seen in the light of the whole of the surrounding circumstances.

Edited by madbung

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I got back to Japan in January and was keen to get back on track as quickly as possible. Europe is god-awful for track accessibility (by comparison), so I picked up a first-gen GT86 in December just to have something I could jump into right away. The Skyline came over in a container this time and landed in early January. It was a bit battered after Europe, though—I refused to do anything beyond essential upkeep while it was over there. The clutch master cylinder gave out, and so did the power steering. I didn’t even bother changing the oil; it was the same stuff that went in just before I left Japan the first time. Naughty. Power steering parts would’ve cost double with shipping and taxes, so knowing I’d be heading back to Japan, I just postponed it and powered through the arm workout. It took a solid three months to get the car back on the road. Registration was a nightmare this time around. There were a bunch of BS fees to navigate, and sourcing parts was a headache. I needed stock seats for shaken, mistakenly blew 34k JPY on some ENR34 seats—which, of course, didn’t fit—then ended up having the car’s technical sheet amended to register it as a two-seater with the Brides. Then there’s the GT86. Amazing car. Does everything I want it to do. Parts are cheap, easy to find, and I don’t care what anyone says—it’s super rewarding to drive. I’ve done a few basic mods: diff ratio, coilovers, discs, pads, seat, etc. It already had a new exhaust manifold and the 180kph limiter removed, so I assume it’s running some kind of map. I’ve just been thrashing it at the track non-stop—mostly Fuji Speedway now, since I need something with higher speed after all that autobahn time. The wheels on the R34 always pissed me off—too big, and it was a nightmare getting tires to fit properly under the arches. So I threw in the towel and bought something that fits better. Looks way cleaner too (at least to me)—less hotboy, less attention-seeking. Still an R34, though. Now for future plans. There are a few things still outstanding with the car. First up, the rear subframe needs an overhaul—that’s priority one. Next, I need to figure out an engine rebuild plan. No timeline yet, but I want to keep it economical—not cutting corners, just not throwing tens of thousands at a mechanic I can barely communicate with. And finally, paint. Plus a bit of tidying up here and there.  
    • Nope, needed to clearance under the bar a little with a heat gun, a 1/2" extension as the "clearancer", and big hammer, I was aware of this from the onset, they fit a 2.0 with this intake no problems, but, the 2.5 is around 15mm taller than a 2.0, so "clearancing" was required  It "just" touched when test fitting, now, I have about 10mm of clearance  You cannot see where it was done, and so far, there's no contact when giving it the beans Happy days
    • It's been a while since I've updated this thread. The last year (and some) has been very hectic. In the second-half of 2024 I took the R34 on a trip through Germany, Italy, France and Switzerland - it was f*cking great. I got a little annoyed with the attention the car was getting around Europe and really didn't drive it that much. I could barely work on the car since I was living in an inner-city apartment (with underground parking). During the trip, the car lost power steering in France - split hose - and I ended up driving around 4,000kms with no power steering.  There were a few Nurburgring trips here and there, but in total the R34 amassed just shy of 7,000kms on European roads. Long story short, I broke up with the reason I was transferred to Europe for and requested to be moved back to Japan. The E90, loved it. It was a sunk cost of around EUR 10,000 and I sold it to a friend for EUR 1,500 just to get rid of it quickly. Trust me, moving countries f*cking sucks and I could not be bothered to be as methodical as I was the first time around.
    • I assume clearances were all a-okay?
×
×
  • Create New...