Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Document
category: AU
identifier: No. 40 of 2006
description: An Act to amend the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979, and for related purposes
proposed by: legis2cml
curation status: Proposed

1 Short title
type: Concept
realized by: sec-1
note: Citation of the Act
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-1-norm

2 Commencement
type: Concept
realized by: sec-2
note: Commencement rules for each provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-2-norm

1 Section 1
type: Concept
realized by: sec-1-2
note: Table of sections and commencement provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-1-2-norm

3 May 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-3
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-3-norm

2 Section 2
type: Concept
realized by: sec-2-2
note: Commencement of provisions
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-2-2-norm

13 June 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-13
note: See F2006L01623 for further information.
references: F2006L01623
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-13-norm

3 Section 3
type: Concept
realized by: sec-3-2
note: Schedule 4
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-3-2-norm

1 July 2006.
type: Concept
realized by: sec-1-3
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-1-3-norm

1 July 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-1-4
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-1-4-norm

2 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-2-3
note: Commencement information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-2-3-norm

4 Section 4
type: Concept
realized by: sec-4
note: Schedule 5 commencement provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-4-logic-alleninterval-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-4-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Applicable
logic summary: Defines commencement period
premise text: 6 months beginning on the day of Royal Assent
conclusion text: first day after end of that period
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

3 November
type: Concept
realized by: sec-3-3
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-3-3-norm

5 Section 5
type: Concept
realized by: sec-5
note: Conditional commencement of item 10 of Schedule 1 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment (Stored Communications and Other Measures) Act 2005.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-5-norm

1 October 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-1-5
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-1-5-norm

6 Section 6
type: Concept
realized by: sec-6
note: The day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-6-norm

3 May 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-3-4
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-3-4-norm

7 Section 7
type: Concept
realized by: sec-7
note: Conditional commencement of item 10 of Schedule 1 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment (Stored Communications and Other Measures) Act 2005.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-7-norm

1 October 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-1-6
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-1-6-norm

8 Section 8
type: Concept
realized by: sec-8
note: Commencement of the Act
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-8-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-8-logic-alleninterval-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-8-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Applicable
logic summary: Temporal interval
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

3 May 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-3-5
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-3-5-norm

9 Section 9
type: Concept
realized by: sec-9
note: Conditional commencement of section 17
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-9-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-9-logic-alleninterval-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-9-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Applicable
logic summary: Requires relation between identifiable temporal intervals
premise text: Section 17 commencement triggers the effect
conclusion text: Temporal interval relation required
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

1 February 1994
type: Concept
realized by: sec-1-7
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-1-7-norm

10 Section 10
type: Concept
realized by: sec-10
note: Commencement of the Act
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-10-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-10-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-10-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: begins
logic summary: Starts on a specific day
premise text: The Act receives Royal Assent
conclusion text: This Act comes into force on the specified day
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

3 May 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-3-6
note: Note on table limitations
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-3-6-norm

3 Schedule(s)
type: Concept
realized by: sec-3-7
note: Schedule items have effect according to their terms.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.6
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-3-7-norm

4 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sec-4-2
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.8
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sec-4-2-norm

1 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-1
note: Definition of stored communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.8
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 1 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: defines
logic summary: Defines the concept of stored communication
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: classifies
logic summary: Classifies as a legal definition
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

2 After section 5D
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-2
note: Insert clause after section 5D
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.8
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-2-norm

5E Serious contraventions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5e
has part: 5E(1) Serious contraventions
has part: 5E(2) Serious contraventions
has part: 5E(3) Serious contraventions
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.8

5E(1) Serious contraventions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5e-ss-1
part of: 5E Serious contraventions
note: Serious contraventions are prohibited.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.8
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits serious contraventions.
premise text: (1) For the purposes of this Act, a serious contravention is a...
conclusion text: ...a serious contravention is a contravention of a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

5E(2) Serious contraventions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2
part of: 5E Serious contraventions
note: A contravention is taken to be a contravention if it has been committed or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having been committed.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.8
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-epistemic-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-ltl-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5E(2) Serious contraventions
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: takes
logic summary: The state takes a contravention to be a contravention.
premise text: (2) Except so far as the contrary intention appears, a contravention...
conclusion text: ...is taken, for the purposes of this Act, to be a contravention...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: takes
logic summary: The state takes a suspected contravention to be a contravention.
premise text: (2) Except so far as the contrary intention appears, a contravention..., or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having been committed...
conclusion text: ...is taken, for the purposes of this Act, to be a contravention...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-epistemic-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Epistemic
operator: suspected
logic summary: A contravention is suspected if it has reasonable grounds.
premise text: (2) Except so far as the contrary intention appears, a contravention..., or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having been committed...
conclusion text: ...is taken, for the purposes of this Act, to be a contravention...
execution surface: modalities::epistemic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-2-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: being
logic summary: A contravention is being committed if it has reasonable grounds.
premise text: (2) Except so far as the contrary intention appears, a contravention..., or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having been committed...
conclusion text: ...is taken, for the purposes of this Act, to be a contravention...
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5E(3) Serious contraventions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3
part of: 5E Serious contraventions
note: Reference to penalty units includes reference to equivalent fine or pecuniary penalty amount.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.8
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-ltl-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-diffusion-5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-cogai-6

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: =
logic summary: Equivalent amounts are treated as equal in this context.
premise text: (3) To avoid doubt, a reference...
conclusion text: ...that number of penalty units includes... equivalent fine or pecuniary penalty amount.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: =
logic summary: Equivalent amounts are treated as equal in this context.
premise text: (3) To avoid doubt, a reference...
conclusion text: ...that number of penalty units includes... equivalent fine or pecuniary penalty amount.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: =
logic summary: Temporal intervals are relevant in this context.
premise text: (3) To avoid doubt, a reference...
conclusion text: ...that number of penalty units includes... equivalent fine or pecuniary penalty amount.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: =
logic summary: Temporal intervals are relevant in this context.
premise text: (3) To avoid doubt, a reference...
conclusion text: ...that number of penalty units includes... equivalent fine or pecuniary penalty amount.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-diffusion-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: =
logic summary: Temporal intervals are relevant in this context.
premise text: (3) To avoid doubt, a reference...
conclusion text: ...that number of penalty units includes... equivalent fine or pecuniary penalty amount.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5e-ss-3-logic-cogai-6
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: =
logic summary: Temporal intervals are relevant in this context.
premise text: (3) To avoid doubt, a reference...
conclusion text: ...that number of penalty units includes... equivalent fine or pecuniary penalty amount.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5F When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5f
has part: 5F(1) When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
has part: 5F(2) When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.9

5F(1) When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1
part of: 5F When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
note: A communication starts passing over a telecommunications system when sent or transmitted.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.9
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-ltl-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-diffusion-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5F(1) When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: starts
logic summary: Communication starts
premise text: (a) is taken to start passing over a telecommunications system when it is sent or transmitted by the person sending the communication.
conclusion text: (1) For the purposes of this Act, a communication: (a) is taken to start passing over a telecommunications system when it is sent or transmitted by the person sending the communication.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: continues
logic summary: Communication continues
premise text: (b) is taken to continue to pass over the system until it becomes accessible to the intended recipient of the communication.
conclusion text: (1) For the purposes of this Act, a communication: (a) is taken to start passing over a telecommunications system when it is sent or transmitted by the person sending the communication. (b) is taken to continue to pass over the system until it becomes accessible to the intended recipient of the communication.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: During transmission
premise text: (b) is taken to continue to pass over the system until it becomes accessible to the intended recipient of the communication.
conclusion text: The communication passes over the system during transmission.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: During transmission
premise text: (b) is taken to continue to pass over the system until it becomes accessible to the intended recipient of the communication.
conclusion text: The communication passes over the system during transmission.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-1-logic-diffusion-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: during
logic summary: During transmission
premise text: (b) is taken to continue to pass over the system until it becomes accessible to the intended recipient of the communication.
conclusion text: The communication diffuses during transmission.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5F(2) When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2
part of: 5F When a communication is passing over a telecommunications
note: Communication from AFP address not to start passing over telecommunications system until no longer under control of specified employees.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.9
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-ltl-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: Prohibits passing over telecommunications system
premise text: (2) However, if a communication is sent from an address on a computer network operated by or on behalf of the Australian Federal Police...
conclusion text: it is taken not to start passing over a telecommunications system, for the purposes of this Act.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Communication starts when no longer under control of specified employees
premise text: (2) However, if a communication is sent from an address on a computer network operated by or on behalf of the Australian Federal Police...
conclusion text: until it is no longer under the control of any of the following:
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Until
logic summary: Communication ends when employee loses control
premise text: (a) any AFP employee responsible for operating, protecting and maintaining the network;
conclusion text: until it is no longer under the control of any of the following:
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5f-ss-2-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Until
logic summary: Communication ends when employee loses control
premise text: (b) any AFP employee responsible for enforcement of the professional standards of the Australian Federal Police.
conclusion text: until it is no longer under the control of any of the following:
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

6 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-6
note: Ceases effect after 2 years from commencement
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6-norm

5G The intended recipient of a communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5g
has part: 5G(1) The intended recipient of a communication
has part: 5G(2) The intended recipient of a communication
has part: 5G(3) The intended recipient of a communication
has part: 5G(4) The intended recipient of a communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10

5G(1) The intended recipient of a communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5g-ss-1
part of: 5G The intended recipient of a communication
note: Defines intended recipient of a communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-1-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5G(1) The intended recipient of a communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

5G(2) The intended recipient of a communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2
part of: 5G The intended recipient of a communication
note: Intended recipients of a communication addressed to an AFP employee or the Australian Federal Police.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-ltl-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5G(2) The intended recipient of a communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes AFP employees and their superiors.
premise text: (2) In addition to the person who is the intended recipient of a communication under subsection (1), if a communication is addressed to a person at an address on a computer network operated by or on behalf of the Australian Federal Police, each of the following is also an intended recipient of the communication for the purposes of this Act:
conclusion text: (a) any AFP employee responsible for operating, protecting and maintaining the network;
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes enforcement personnel.
premise text: (2) In addition to the person who is the intended recipient of a communication under subsection (1), if a communication is addressed to a person at an address on a computer network operated by or on behalf of the Australian Federal Police, each of the following is also an intended recipient of the communication for the purposes of this Act:
conclusion text: (b) any AFP employee responsible for enforcement of the professional standards of the Australian Federal Police;
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: During the operation and maintenance of the network.
premise text: (2) In addition to the person who is the intended recipient of a communication under subsection (1), if a communication is addressed to a person at an address on a computer network operated by or on behalf of the Australian Federal Police, each of the following is also an intended recipient of the communication for the purposes of this Act:
conclusion text: (a) any AFP employee responsible for operating, protecting and maintaining the network;
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-2-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: During the enforcement of professional standards.
premise text: (2) In addition to the person who is the intended recipient of a communication under subsection (1), if a communication is addressed to a person at an address on a computer network operated by or on behalf of the Australian Federal Police, each of the following is also an intended recipient of the communication for the purposes of this Act:
conclusion text: (b) any AFP employee responsible for enforcement of the professional standards of the Australian Federal Police;
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5G(3) The intended recipient of a communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5g-ss-3
part of: 5G The intended recipient of a communication
note: Ceases to have effect after 2 years from commencement
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-3-norm

5G(4) The intended recipient of a communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5g-ss-4
part of: 5G The intended recipient of a communication
note: Reference to intended recipient of communication is taken to be a reference to an intended recipient of the communication.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5G(4) The intended recipient of a communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5g-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: takes
logic summary: Implies obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5H When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5h
has part: 5H(1) When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
has part: 5H(2) When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10

5H(1) When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1
part of: 5H When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
note: A communication is accessible to its intended recipient if it has been received, stored under control, or delivered.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5H(1) When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: hasAccess
logic summary: Has access to a communication
premise text: The communication is accessible to its intended recipient.
conclusion text: The recipient has access to the communication.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: During a time period, a communication is accessible to its intended recipient
premise text: A communication is accessible to its intended recipient if it has been received, stored under control, or delivered.
conclusion text: The communication is accessible during the time period.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: until
logic summary: Until a certain point in time, a communication is accessible to its intended recipient
premise text: A communication is accessible to its intended recipient if it has been received, stored under control, or delivered.
conclusion text: The communication is not accessible after the point in time.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: if
logic summary: If a condition is met, a communication is accessible to its intended recipient
premise text: A communication is accessible to its intended recipient if it has been received, stored under control, or delivered.
conclusion text: The condition is met and the communication is accessible.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-1-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: then
logic summary: Then a communication is accessible to its intended recipient
premise text: A communication is accessible to its intended recipient if it has been received, stored under control, or delivered.
conclusion text: The action then results in the communication being accessible.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5H(2) When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5h-ss-2
part of: 5H When a communication is accessible to the intended recipient
note: No limitation on accessibility for the purposes of this Act.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.10
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5h-ss-2-norm

3 After section 6
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-3
note: Insert clause
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.11
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-3-norm

6AA Accessing a stored communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-6aa
note: Accessing a stored communication without knowledge of the recipient is prohibited.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.11
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6aa-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6aa-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6aa-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6aa-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 6AA Accessing a stored communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6aa-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits accessing stored communication without knowledge of the recipient.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6aa-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classify
logic summary: Classifies as prohibition for accessing stored communication.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

4 After section 6DA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-4
note: Insert clause
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.11
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-4-norm

6DB Issuing authorities
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-6db
has part: 6DB(1) Issuing authorities
has part: 6DB(2) Issuing authorities
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.11

6DB(1) Issuing authorities
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-6db-ss-1
part of: 6DB Issuing authorities
note: Minister may appoint issuing authorities
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.11
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 6DB(1) Issuing authorities
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Permission to appoint issuing authorities
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

6DB(2) Issuing authorities
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-6db-ss-2
part of: 6DB Issuing authorities
note: A person who is issuing authorities must store communications.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.11
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 6DB(2) Issuing authorities
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6db-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide stored communications.
premise text: Issuing authorities must store communications.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

8 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-8
has part: 8(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 8(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.12

8(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-8-ss-3
part of: 8 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Appointment ceases if the person is no longer eligible for appointment or is revoked by the Minister.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.12
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 8(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: Prohibits appointment if conditions are not met.
premise text: (a) the person ceases to be a person whom the Minister could appoint under this section;
conclusion text: (3) A person’s appointment ceases to have effect if:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: Prohibits appointment if revoked by the Minister.
premise text: (b) the Minister, by writing, revokes the appointment;
conclusion text: (3) A person’s appointment ceases to have effect if:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Appointment can only occur within a specific time frame.
premise text: (a) the person ceases to be a person whom the Minister could appoint under this section;
conclusion text: A person’s appointment ceases to have effect if:
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Appointment can only occur within a specific time frame.
premise text: (b) the Minister, by writing, revokes the appointment;
conclusion text: A person’s appointment ceases to have effect if:
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

8(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-8-ss-4
part of: 8 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Issuing authority has same protection and immunity as a Justice of the High Court.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.12
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 8(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: has
logic summary: Protection and immunity
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5 After section 6EA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-5
note: Insert clause
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.12
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-5-norm

6EB Stored communications warrant information
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-6eb
note: Information about stored communications warrant applications, issues, existence, and expiry.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.12
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6eb-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6eb-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6eb-logic-alleninterval-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6eb-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 6EB Stored communications warrant information
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6eb-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligate
logic summary: Information about stored communications warrant applications, issues, existence, and expiry.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6eb-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: >=
logic summary: Temporal relation between stored communications warrant issuance and expiry
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

6 After subsection 9(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-6-2
note: Reference to stored communications includes accessing of communications after they have ceased to pass over a telecommunications system.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.12
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 6 After subsection 9(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Inclusion of stored communications in the reference.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-6-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: subClassOf
logic summary: Stored communications are a subclass of telecommunications services.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

7 After subsection 9A(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-7
note: Inserts a reference to accessing stored communications after they have ceased to pass over a telecommunications system.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.13
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-7-norm

8 After subsection 10(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-8-2
note: Clarifies interception not commencing
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.13
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-8-2-norm

9 After Part XA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-9
note: Insert Chapter 3—Access to stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.13
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-9-norm

108 Stored communications not to be accessed
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-108
note: Accessing or authorizing access to stored communications is prohibited.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.13
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-108-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-108-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-108-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 108 Stored communications not to be accessed
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-108-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits accessing or authorizing access to stored communications.
premise text: (1) A person commits an offence...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-10
has part: 10(1A) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 10(2) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 10(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 10(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.14

10(1A) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-10-ss-1a
part of: 10 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: A person must provide written notice of an intention to perform an act.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.14
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-1a-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-1a-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-1a-logic-epistemic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-1a-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 10(1A) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-1a-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide notice
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-1a-logic-epistemic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Epistemic
operator: KNEW
logic summary: Knows of the intention
execution surface: modalities::epistemic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10(2) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-10-ss-2
part of: 10 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Exemptions from interception warrants for certain employees and officials.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.14
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 10(2) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to exempt certain employees and officials from interception warrants.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-10-ss-3
part of: 10 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Access to a stored communication is under an interception warrant if the warrant would have authorised interception of the communication.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.14
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 10(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: if-and-only-if
logic summary: Conditional obligation
premise text: The warrant would have authorised interception of the communication.
conclusion text: Access to a stored communication is under an interception warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal relation between intercepted and stored communications
premise text: The warrant would have authorised interception of the communication if it were still passing over a telecommunications system.
conclusion text: Access to a stored communication is under an interception warrant during the time the communication was being transmitted.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal relation between intercepted and stored communications
premise text: The warrant would have authorised interception of the communication if it were still passing over a telecommunications system.
conclusion text: Access to a stored communication is under an interception warrant during the time the communication was being transmitted.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: if
logic summary: Conditional diffusion of access to a stored communication
premise text: The warrant would have authorised interception of the communication if it were still passing over a telecommunications system.
conclusion text: Access to a stored communication is under an interception warrant if the warrant would have authorised interception of the communication.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-3-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: if
logic summary: Conditional access to a stored communication based on warrant authorisation
premise text: The warrant would have authorised interception of the communication if it were still passing over a telecommunications system.
conclusion text: Access to a stored communication is under an interception warrant if the warrant would have authorised interception of the communication.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-10-ss-4
part of: 10 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Court must consider regulations when determining reasonableness of actions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.14
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 10(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: mustConsider
logic summary: Court must consider regulations
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

12 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-12
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.16
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-12-norm

109 Access to stored communications under Part 2-2 warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-109
note: Authorizing interception of communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.16
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 109 Access to stored communications under Part 2-2 warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: authorizes
logic summary: Implies authorization
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

110 Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-110
has part: 110(1) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
has part: 110(2) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
has part: 110(3) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
has part: 110(4) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.16

110(1) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-110-ss-1
part of: 110 Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
note: Enforcement agency may apply for stored communications warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.16
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 110(1) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: May
logic summary: Obligation to apply for warrant
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

110(2) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-110-ss-2
part of: 110 Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
note: Application must be made on behalf of the agency by a person or officer
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.16
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Application must be made on behalf of the agency
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

110(3) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-110-ss-3
part of: 110 Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
note: Agency officer may nominate an office for management purposes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.16
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-3-norm

110(4) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-110-ss-4
part of: 110 Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
note: Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.16
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-4-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 110(4) Enforcement agencies may apply for stored communications
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

111 Form of applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-111
has part: 111(1) Form of applications
has part: 111(2) Form of applications
has part: 111(3) Form of applications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17

111(1) Form of applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-111-ss-1
part of: 111 Form of applications
note: Application must be in writing.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 111(1) Form of applications
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must be in writing.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

111(2) Form of applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-111-ss-2
part of: 111 Form of applications
note: Telephone application permitted under urgent circumstances
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-2-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 111(2) Form of applications
borne by: NaturalPerson
scope note: borne by: NaturalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permits telephone application
premise text: Chief officer authorisation
conclusion text: Telephone application permitted
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

111(3) Form of applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-111-ss-3
part of: 111 Form of applications
note: Authorises persons to make applications on behalf of the agency.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-3-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 111(3) Form of applications
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Authorize
logic summary: Authorisation is granted.
premise text: Chief officer may authorise persons.
conclusion text: Persons are entitled to make applications.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

112 Contents of written applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-112
note: Application must provide agency name and applicant's name.
description: yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-112-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-112-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-112-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 112 Contents of written applications
borne by: LegalPerson
scope note: borne by: LegalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-112-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: must
logic summary: Application must provide agency name and applicant's name.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

113 Affidavits to accompany written applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-113
has part: 113(1) Affidavits to accompany written applications
has part: 113(2) Affidavits to accompany written applications
has part: 113(3) Affidavits to accompany written applications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17

113(1) Affidavits to accompany written applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-113-ss-1
part of: 113 Affidavits to accompany written applications
note: Application must be accompanied by an affidavit.
description: Affidavit
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 113(1) Affidavits to accompany written applications
borne by: LegalPerson
scope note: borne by: LegalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide affidavit
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

113(2) Affidavits to accompany written applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-113-ss-2
part of: 113 Affidavits to accompany written applications
note: Affidavits must set out facts and grounds for application
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 113(2) Affidavits to accompany written applications
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Affidavits must be provided
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

113(3) Affidavits to accompany written applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-113-ss-3
part of: 113 Affidavits to accompany written applications
note: Affidavits may be submitted in addition to the required affidavit.
description: 2 or more affidavits
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 113(3) Affidavits to accompany written applications
borne by: LegalPerson
scope note: borne by: LegalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: requires
logic summary: Affidavits are required for written applications
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

114 Information to be given on telephone applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-114
note: Must provide information on telephone applications
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.17
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-114-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-114-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-114-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 114 Information to be given on telephone applications
borne by: NaturalPerson
scope note: borne by: NaturalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-114-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST PROVIDE
logic summary: Must provide information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

14 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-14
note: Application must include certain matters when made by telephone or in writing.
description: True
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-14-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-14-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-14-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 14 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-14-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Application must include certain matters.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

115 Giving further information to Judge
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-115
has part: 115(1) Giving further information to Judge
has part: 115(2) Giving further information to Judge
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18

115(1) Giving further information to Judge
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-115-ss-1
part of: 115 Giving further information to Judge
note: Issuing authority may require further information.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 115(1) Giving further information to Judge
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Obligation to provide information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

115(2) Giving further information to Judge
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-115-ss-2
part of: 115 Giving further information to Judge
note: Must provide further information on oath or orally as directed.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 115(2) Giving further information to Judge
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide further information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

116 Issuing of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-116
has part: 116(1) Issuing of stored communications warrants
has part: 116(2) Issuing of stored communications warrants
has part: 116(3) Issuing of stored communications warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18

116(1) Issuing of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-116-ss-1
part of: 116 Issuing of stored communications warrants
note: Issuing authority must issue a stored communications warrant if certain conditions are met.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 116(1) Issuing of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Issuing authority has an obligation to issue a stored communications warrant if certain conditions are met.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

116(2) Issuing of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-116-ss-2
part of: 116 Issuing of stored communications warrants
note: Authority must consider privacy impact and investigation methods when issuing stored communications warrants.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-deontic-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-deontic-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 116(2) Issuing of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Authority has an obligation to consider privacy impact and investigation methods.
premise text: (2) The matters to which the issuing authority must have regard...
conclusion text: The authority must consider the specified factors.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: The authority's consideration overlaps with investigation methods used by or available to the agency.
premise text: (2) The matters to which the issuing authority must have regard...
conclusion text: The authority's consideration overlaps with existing investigation methods.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-deontic-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Authority has an obligation to consider the prejudice of using stored communications warrants.
premise text: (2) The matters to which the issuing authority must have regard...
conclusion text: The authority must consider the potential prejudice.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-2-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Authority has an obligation to consider the impact on investigation by using stored communications warrants.
premise text: (2) The matters to which the issuing authority must have regard...
conclusion text: The authority must consider the potential impact.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

116(3) Issuing of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-116-ss-3
part of: 116 Issuing of stored communications warrants
note: Warrant may be issued in relation to investigation of more than one serious contravention.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.18
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 116(3) Issuing of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: ISSUANCE
logic summary: Issuance of warrant
premise text: (3) The warrant may be issued...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

117 What stored communications warrants authorise
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-117
note: Authorises access to stored communication under specified conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.19
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-117-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-117-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-117-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 117 What stored communications warrants authorise
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-117-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Authorize
logic summary: Grants permission.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

16 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-16
note: Stored communication condition for interception warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 16 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: hasCondition
logic summary: Stored communication requirement
premise text: (b) that another person has made and for which the intended recipient is the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued;
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: overlaps
logic summary: Temporal overlap between communication creation and interception
premise text: (b) that another person has made and for which the intended recipient is the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued;
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: holdsAt
logic summary: Temporal relationship between communication creation and interception
premise text: (b) that another person has made and for which the intended recipient is the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued;
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: diffusesInto
logic summary: Communication diffusion into interception context
premise text: (b) that another person has made and for which the intended recipient is the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued;
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: isRelatedTo
logic summary: Artificial intelligence application to stored communication
premise text: (b) that another person has made and for which the intended recipient is the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued;
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

118 Form and content of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-118
has part: 118(1) Form and content of stored communications warrants
has part: 118(2) Form and content of stored communications warrants
has part: 118(3) Form and content of stored communications warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20

118(1) Form and content of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-118-ss-1
part of: 118 Form and content of stored communications warrants
note: Stored communications warrant must be signed by issuing authority
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 118(1) Form and content of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide a signed warrant
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

118(2) Form and content of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-118-ss-2
part of: 118 Form and content of stored communications warrants
note: Conditions or restrictions for accessing stored communications under the warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 118(2) Form and content of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: specifies
logic summary: Specifying conditions or restrictions
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

118(3) Form and content of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-118-ss-3
part of: 118 Form and content of stored communications warrants
note: Issuing authority must set out particulars of serious contraventions in a stored communications warrant.
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 118(3) Form and content of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide particulars of serious contraventions
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

119 Duration of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-119
has part: 119(1) Duration of stored communications warrants
has part: 119(2) Duration of stored communications warrants
has part: 119(3) Duration of stored communications warrants
has part: 119(4) Duration of stored communications warrants
has part: 119(5) Duration of stored communications warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20

119(1) Duration of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-119-ss-1
part of: 119 Duration of stored communications warrants
note: A stored communications warrant remains in force until it is first executed or the end of 5 days after its issue, whichever occurs sooner.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-ltl-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-diffusion-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 119(1) Duration of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: holds
logic summary: The warrant holds until it is executed or the end of 5 days after its issue.
premise text: (a) until it is first executed; (b) until the end of the period of 5 days after the day on which it was issued;
conclusion text: A stored communications warrant remains in force:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: holds
logic summary: The warrant holds until the end of 5 days after its issue.
premise text: (b) until the end of the period of 5 days after the day on which it was issued;
conclusion text: A stored communications warrant remains in force:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: overlaps
logic summary: The duration overlaps with the end of 5 days after its issue.
premise text: (a) until it is first executed; (b) until the end of the period of 5 days after the day on which it was issued;
conclusion text: Duration of stored communications warrants
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: until
logic summary: The duration is an upper bound for the warrant's existence.
premise text: (a) until it is first executed; (b) until the end of the period of 5 days after the day on which it was issued;
conclusion text: Duration of stored communications warrants
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-1-logic-diffusion-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: diffuses
logic summary: The warrant diffuses to all parties with access to the communication.
premise text: (a) until it is first executed; (b) until the end of the period of 5 days after the day on which it was issued;
conclusion text: Duration of stored communications warrants
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

119(2) Duration of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-119-ss-2
part of: 119 Duration of stored communications warrants
note: Warrant remains in force for a telecommunications service operated by a particular carrier.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 119(2) Duration of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: holds
logic summary: The warrant holds for the specified telecommunications service.
premise text: (2) However, if the warrant relates to more than one telecommunications service and those services are not all operated by the same carrier...
conclusion text: The warrant remains in force for a telecommunications service operated by a particular carrier.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: The warrant remains in force during the specified period.
premise text: (2) However, if the warrant relates to more than one telecommunications service and those services are not all operated by the same carrier...
conclusion text: The warrant remains in force until the end of the period of 5 days after the day on which it was issued.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: until
logic summary: The warrant remains in force until the specified event occurs.
premise text: (2) However, if the warrant relates to more than one telecommunications service and those services are not all operated by the same carrier...
conclusion text: The warrant remains in force until it is first executed in relation to a telecommunications service operated by that particular carrier.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: diffuses
logic summary: The warrant diffuses to other telecommunications services operated by the same carrier.
premise text: (2) However, if the warrant relates to more than one telecommunications service and those services are not all operated by the same carrier...
conclusion text: The warrant remains in force for a telecommunications service operated by a particular carrier.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-2-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: recognizes
logic summary: The warrant is recognized as a valid warrant for telecommunications services.
premise text: (2) However, if the warrant relates to more than one telecommunications service and those services are not all operated by the same carrier...
conclusion text: The warrant remains in force for a telecommunications service operated by a particular carrier.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

119(3) Duration of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-119-ss-3
part of: 119 Duration of stored communications warrants
note: Cannot vary stored communications warrant duration
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: cannot
logic summary: Prohibition of varying warrant duration
premise text: (3) An issuing authority must not vary a stored communications warrant by extending the period for which it is to be in force.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Defines duration of warrant as part of stored communications warrant
premise text: (3) An issuing authority must not vary a stored communications warrant by extending the period for which it is to be in force.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: Defines duration of warrant as part of stored communications warrant
premise text: (3) An issuing authority must not vary a stored communications warrant by extending the period for which it is to be in force.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: during
logic summary: Defines duration of warrant as part of stored communications warrant
premise text: (3) An issuing authority must not vary a stored communications warrant by extending the period for which it is to be in force.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-3-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: during
logic summary: Defines duration of warrant as part of stored communications warrant
premise text: (3) An issuing authority must not vary a stored communications warrant by extending the period for which it is to be in force.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

119(4) Duration of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-119-ss-4
part of: 119 Duration of stored communications warrants
note: Issue of further warrant not prevented
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 119(4) Duration of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to issue further warrant
premise text: (4) This section does not prevent the issue of a further warrant in respect of the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Temporal overlap between warrants
premise text: (4) This section does not prevent the issue of a further warrant in respect of the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Until
logic summary: Temporal relationship between warrants
premise text: (4) This section does not prevent the issue of a further warrant in respect of the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Diffuses
logic summary: Diffusion of warrants
premise text: (4) This section does not prevent the issue of a further warrant in respect of the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-4-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Inference
logic summary: Inference from warrants
premise text: (4) This section does not prevent the issue of a further warrant in respect of the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

119(5) Duration of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-119-ss-5
part of: 119 Duration of stored communications warrants
note: No new warrant can be issued within 3 days of the previous warrant's execution.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.20
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: No new warrant can be issued within 3 days of the previous warrant's execution.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Temporal overlap with previous warrant
premise text: (5) However, if the further warrant relates to the same telecommunications service as the previous warrant
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Until
logic summary: Temporal restriction on issuing new warrants
premise text: (5) However, if the further warrant relates to the same telecommunications service as the previous warrant
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Restricts
logic summary: Limits issuance of new warrants within a time frame
premise text: (5) However, if the further warrant relates to the same telecommunications service as the previous warrant
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-ss-5-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Restricts
logic summary: Limits issuance of new warrants within a time frame
premise text: (5) However, if the further warrant relates to the same telecommunications service as the previous warrant
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

120 Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-120
has part: 120(1) Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
has part: 120(2) Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.21

120(1) Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-120-ss-1
part of: 120 Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
note: Issuing authority must inform and provide warrant to applicant.
description: warrant terms, signing day, and time
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.21
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 120(1) Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to inform and provide warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

120(2) Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-120-ss-2
part of: 120 Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
note: Affidavits must be provided by the applicant within one day after a warrant is issued.
description: affidavit or affidavits, copy of authorisation
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.21
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 120(2) Stored communications warrants issued on telephone
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide affidavit and authorisation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

18 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-18
has part: 18(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 18(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22

18(3) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-18-ss-3
part of: 18 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Revocation of warrant by issuing authority
description: instrument of revocation, notification to applicant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition on issuing warrant without compliance
premise text: Subsection (2) has not been complied with
conclusion text: Revocation of warrant
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

18(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-18-ss-4
part of: 18 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Inform another agency of revocation and provide a copy of the instrument.
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 18(4) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Agency must inform and provide a copy.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

121 What happens when stored communications warrants are
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-121
note: Inform Managing Director of carrier about issued warrant and provide certified copy.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-121-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-121-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-121-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 121 What happens when stored communications warrants are
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-121-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Agency must inform carrier about warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

122 Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-122
has part: 122(1) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
has part: 122(2) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
has part: 122(3) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
has part: 122(4) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22

122(1) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-122-ss-1
part of: 122 Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
note: Chief officer must inform and revoke stored communications warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 122(1) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Duty to inform and revoke warrant.
premise text: Chief officer has issued the warrant.
conclusion text: Inform and revoke warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

122(2) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-122-ss-2
part of: 122 Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
note: Chief officer may revoke warrant issued to agency after informing other agencies.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-deontic-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 122(2) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits chief officer from revoking warrant without informing other agencies.
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may at any time, by writing signed by him or her...
conclusion text: The chief officer may not revoke the warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes an obligation on the chief officer to inform other agencies before revoking a warrant.
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may at any time, by writing signed by him or her...
conclusion text: The chief officer must inform other agencies before revoking a warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Temporal Interval
logic summary: Defines the temporal interval for informing other agencies before revoking a warrant.
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may at any time, by writing signed by him or her...
conclusion text: The chief officer must inform other agencies within the defined temporal interval.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-2-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permission
logic summary: Grants permission to the chief officer to revoke a warrant after informing other agencies.
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may at any time, by writing signed by him or her...
conclusion text: The chief officer is permitted to revoke a warrant after informing other agencies.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

122(3) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-122-ss-3
part of: 122 Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
note: Delegation of power to a certifying officer
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-3-norm

122(4) Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-122-ss-4
part of: 122 Revocation of stored communications warrants by chief officers
note: Section does not apply in relation to a warrant that has ceased to be in force.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.22
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-ss-4-norm

123 What happens when stored communications warrants are
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-123
has part: 123(1) What happens when stored communications warrants are
has part: 123(2) What happens when stored communications warrants are
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.23

123(1) What happens when stored communications warrants are
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-123-ss-1
part of: 123 What happens when stored communications warrants are
note: Chief officer of another enforcement agency must be informed of revocation.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.23
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 123(1) What happens when stored communications warrants are
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Chief officer has an obligation to inform.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

123(2) What happens when stored communications warrants are
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-123-ss-2
part of: 123 What happens when stored communications warrants are
note: Chief officer must inform Managing Director of revocation and provide certified copy.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.23
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 123(2) What happens when stored communications warrants are
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Chief officer has an obligation to inform Managing Director of revocation.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

124 Access to additional telecommunications services under stored
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-124
note: Access to stored communications warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.23
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-124-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-124-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-124-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 124 Access to additional telecommunications services under stored
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-124-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: has
logic summary: State has obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

20 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-20
note: Chief officer must inform Managing Director of carrier about changes in service identification.
description: Confirmation in writing
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.24
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 20 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Duty to inform
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

125 Entry into force of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-125
note: Entry into force of stored communications warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.24
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-125-norm

126 Limit on authority conferred by warrant
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-126
note: Notification required for access to stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.24
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-126-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-126-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-126-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 126 Limit on authority conferred by warrant
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-126-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: requires
logic summary: Requires notification
premise text: Section 121
conclusion text: Access to stored communications
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

127 Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-127
has part: 127(1) Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
has part: 127(2) Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
has part: 127(3) Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.24

127(1) Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-127-ss-1
part of: 127 Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
note: Exercise of authority is restricted to authorized personnel.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.24
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-1-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 127(1) Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Restricts exercise of authority.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

127(2) Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-127-ss-2
part of: 127 Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
note: Agency may approve exercise of authority by officers/staff members of agency or other agencies.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.24
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Agency permits exercise of authority by officers/staff members.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

127(3) Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-127-ss-3
part of: 127 Exercise of authority conferred by warrant
note: Appointment of an approving officer
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.24
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: hasDeonticType
logic summary: Classifies the deontic type of the excerpt
conclusion text: Undertaking
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

128 Provision of technical assistance
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-128
has part: 128(1) Provision of technical assistance
has part: 128(2) Provision of technical assistance
has part: 128(3) Provision of technical assistance
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.25

128(1) Provision of technical assistance
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-128-ss-1
part of: 128 Provision of technical assistance
note: Designated officer or carrier employee may provide technical assistance to enforcement agency officer/staff member exercising stored communications warrant authority.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.25
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permission granted
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

128(2) Provision of technical assistance
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-128-ss-2
part of: 128 Provision of technical assistance
note: Prohibition of accessing stored communications without a warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.25
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-ltl-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-deontic-5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-descriptionlogic-6

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Prohibits the act of accessing stored communications without a warrant
premise text: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the provision of technical assistance includes...
conclusion text: ...the doing of any act in connection with...the installation of equipment for the purposes of accessing stored communications in accordance with a stored communications warrant;
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes provision of technical assistance related to accessing stored communications
premise text: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the provision of technical assistance includes...
conclusion text: ...the doing of any act in connection with...the installation of equipment for the purposes of accessing stored communications in accordance with a stored communications warrant;
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Requires provision of technical assistance during the installation of equipment
premise text: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the provision of technical assistance includes...
conclusion text: ...the doing of any act in connection with...the installation of equipment for the purposes of accessing stored communications in accordance with a stored communications warrant;
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: Requires provision of technical assistance during the maintenance or testing of equipment
premise text: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the provision of technical assistance includes...
conclusion text: ...the doing of any act in connection with...the maintenance, testing or use of such equipment;
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-deontic-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Prohibits the removal of equipment without a warrant
premise text: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the provision of technical assistance includes...
conclusion text: ...the doing of any act in connection with...the removal of such equipment;
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-2-logic-descriptionlogic-6
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes provision of technical assistance related to removing equipment
premise text: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the provision of technical assistance includes...
conclusion text: ...the doing of any act in connection with...the removal of such equipment;
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

128(3) Provision of technical assistance
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-128-ss-3
part of: 128 Provision of technical assistance
note: Declare persons designated officers for the purposes of this section.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.25
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-3-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 128(3) Provision of technical assistance
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: May
logic summary: Permission to declare persons designated officers.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

22 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-22
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-22-norm

129 Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-129
has part: 129(1) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
has part: 129(2) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
has part: 129(3) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26

129(1) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-129-ss-1
part of: 129 Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
note: Carrier or subsidiary may issue written certificate
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 129(1) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Obligation to provide a written certificate
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

129(2) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-129-ss-2
part of: 129 Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
note: Exempt proceeding evidence of certificate matters
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 129(2) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide evidence
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

129(3) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-129-ss-3
part of: 129 Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
note: Determination of corporate subsidiary relationship
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-3-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 129(3) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by carriers
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

130 Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-130
has part: 130(1) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
has part: 130(2) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26

130(1) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-130-ss-1
part of: 130 Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
note: Certifying officer must issue written certificate with relevant facts.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 130(1) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide a written certificate
premise text: Certifying officer has the authority to issue certificates
conclusion text: A written certificate must be issued
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

130(2) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-130-ss-2
part of: 130 Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
note: Exempt proceeding evidence of certificate matters
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.26
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 130(2) Evidentiary certificates relating to actions by enforcement
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide evidence
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

131 Certified copies of stored communications warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-131
note: Exempt proceeding must receive certified copy of stored communications warrant as if it were the original.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.27
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-131-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-131-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-131-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 131 Certified copies of stored communications warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-131-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on exempt proceedings.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

132 Obstruction
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-132
has part: 132(1) Obstruction
has part: 132(2) Obstruction
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.27

132(1) Obstruction
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-132-ss-1
part of: 132 Obstruction
note: Obstructing another person acting under a stored communications warrant is an offence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.27
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-1-logic-deontic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-1-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 132(1) Obstruction
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: Prohibits obstructing another person acting under a stored communications warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-1-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes an obligation on individuals to not obstruct another person acting under a stored communications warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

132(2) Obstruction
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-132-ss-2
part of: 132 Obstruction
note: A reasonable excuse is a valid reason for obstruction or hindering.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.27
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-epistemic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-argumentation-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 132(2) Obstruction
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide a reasonable excuse.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-epistemic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Epistemic
operator: Belief
logic summary: The defendant must believe they have a reasonable excuse.
execution surface: modalities::epistemic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Interval
logic summary: The interval of the reasonable excuse is not specified.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-ss-2-logic-argumentation-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Argumentation
operator: Inference
logic summary: The defendant's excuse is inferred to be reasonable.
execution surface: modalities::argumentation
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

133 No dealing with accessed information or stored communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-133
note: No dealing with accessed information or stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.27
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-133-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-133-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-133-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 133 No dealing with accessed information or stored communications
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-133-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition of communication and use of information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

24 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24
note: Making or giving information in evidence without lawful access is prohibited.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.28
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-deontic-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-diffusion-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition of making or giving information in evidence without lawful access.
premise text: (iii) makes a record of information; or (iv) gives information in evidence in a proceeding
conclusion text: and (i) lawfully accessed information; or (ii) information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1); or (iii) stored communications warrant information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Temporal relation
logic summary: Temporal relation between lawful access and making or giving information in evidence.
premise text: (i) lawfully accessed information; or (ii) information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1); or (iii) stored communications warrant information.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Recurring trace
logic summary: Recurring trace between making or giving information in evidence and lawful access.
premise text: (i) lawfully accessed information; or (ii) information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1); or (iii) stored communications warrant information.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide lawful access when making or giving information in evidence.
premise text: (i) lawfully accessed information; or (ii) information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1); or (iii) stored communications warrant information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-logic-diffusion-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Diffusion
logic summary: Diffusion of obligation to provide lawful access when making or giving information in evidence.
premise text: (i) lawfully accessed information; or (ii) information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1); or (iii) stored communications warrant information.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

134 Dealing in stored communications warrant information for the
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-134
note: Permits communication, use, recording, and evidence of stored communications warrant information.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.28
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-134-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-134-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-134-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 134 Dealing in stored communications warrant information for the
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-134-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: PERM
logic summary: Permits action
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

135 Dealing in information by employees of carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-135
has part: 135(1) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
has part: 135(2) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
has part: 135(3) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
has part: 135(4) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.28

135(1) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-135-ss-1
part of: 135 Dealing in information by employees of carriers
note: Employee must communicate information to authorized officer
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.28
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 135(1) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

135(2) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-135-ss-2
part of: 135 Dealing in information by employees of carriers
note: Authorisation of officers to receive information under stored communications warrants.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.28
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 135(2) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Authorize
logic summary: Granting permission
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may authorise...
conclusion text: ...officers, or classes of officers, of the agency to receive information...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Temporal Interval
logic summary: Conditional commencement
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may authorise in writing...
conclusion text: ...officers, or classes of officers, of the agency to receive information...
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Recurring Trace
logic summary: Ongoing authority
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may authorise in writing...
conclusion text: ...officers, or classes of officers, of the agency to receive information...
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Information Spread
logic summary: Sharing information with agents
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may authorise in writing...
conclusion text: ...officers, or classes of officers, of the agency to receive information...
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-2-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Artificial Intelligence
logic summary: Automation of warrant issuance
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an enforcement agency may authorise in writing...
conclusion text: ...officers, or classes of officers, of the agency to receive information...
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

135(3) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-135-ss-3
part of: 135 Dealing in information by employees of carriers
note: Employee may use lawfully accessed information in performance of duties.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.28
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-3-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 135(3) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: use
logic summary: Obligation to use lawfully accessed information in performance of duties.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-3-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: instanceOf
logic summary: Employee is an instance of a person who may use lawfully accessed information.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

135(4) Dealing in information by employees of carriers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-135-ss-4
part of: 135 Dealing in information by employees of carriers
note: Employee may communicate lawfully accessed information to another carrier for business purposes.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.28
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-4-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permission granted.
premise text: Employee may communicate information.
conclusion text: Information can be communicated.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-ss-4-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classify
logic summary: Classification of communication purposes.
premise text: Communication is for business purposes.
conclusion text: Purpose classified as business.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

26 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-26
has part: 26(5) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 26(6) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30

26(5) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-26-ss-5
part of: 26 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Employee may communicate or make use of stored communications warrant information in performance of duties.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-5-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-5-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-5-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 26(5) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Permission to communicate or make use of stored communications warrant information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

26(6) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-26-ss-6
part of: 26 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Employee must communicate stored communications warrant information to another carrier or employee if necessary.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-6-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-6-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-6-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 26(6) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-ss-6-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

136 Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-136
has part: 136(1) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
has part: 136(2) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
has part: 136(3) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
has part: 136(4) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30

136(1) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-136-ss-1
part of: 136 Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
note: Permits communication of lawfully accessed information for purposes of security.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-argumentation-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-diffusion-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 136(1) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: PERM
logic summary: Permits action
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Specifies temporal relationship with security purposes
premise text: for purposes of security,
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-argumentation-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Argumentation
operator: justification
logic summary: Provides justification for permitted action
premise text: in connection with the performance by the Organisation of its functions, or otherwise
execution surface: modalities::argumentation
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-1-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: diffuse
logic summary: Describes information diffusion mechanism
premise text: communicate to another person, make use of, or make a record of
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

136(2) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-136-ss-2
part of: 136 Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
note: Communication of foreign intelligence information to Organisation employees
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Permission granted
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

136(3) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-136-ss-3
part of: 136 Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
note: Allow foreign intelligence information sharing with Director-General of Security or other officers/employees.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-3-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 136(3) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permission to share foreign intelligence information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

136(4) Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-136-ss-4
part of: 136 Dealing in connection with Organisation’s functions
note: Use foreign intelligence information in connection with Organisation's functions
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.30
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: May
logic summary: Permission to use foreign intelligence information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

137 Communicating information obtained by Organisation
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-137
has part: 137(1) Communicating information obtained by Organisation
has part: 137(2) Communicating information obtained by Organisation
has part: 137(3) Communicating information obtained by Organisation
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.31

137(1) Communicating information obtained by Organisation
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-137-ss-1
part of: 137 Communicating information obtained by Organisation
note: Directors-General must communicate certain information to others.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.31
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

137(2) Communicating information obtained by Organisation
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-137-ss-2
part of: 137 Communicating information obtained by Organisation
note: Authorisation to communicate information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.31
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-argumentation-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Granting permission
premise text: (2) The communication may be made by the Director-General of Security personally or by a person authorised by the Director-General.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Temporal Interval
logic summary: Temporal interval for communication
premise text: (2) The communication may be made by the Director-General of Security personally or by a person authorised by the Director-General.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-argumentation-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Argumentation
operator: Justification
logic summary: Justification for communication method
premise text: (2) The communication may be made by the Director-General of Security personally or by a person authorised by the Director-General.
execution surface: modalities::argumentation
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Spread
logic summary: Communication spread through authorised channels
premise text: (2) The communication may be made by the Director-General of Security personally or by a person authorised by the Director-General.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-2-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Process
logic summary: Automated processing of communication
premise text: (2) The communication may be made by the Director-General of Security personally or by a person authorised by the Director-General.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

137(3) Communicating information obtained by Organisation
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-137-ss-3
part of: 137 Communicating information obtained by Organisation
note: Approved communication of foreign intelligence information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.31
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-linearlogic-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 137(3) Communicating information obtained by Organisation
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Grants permission to communicate
premise text: (3) A person to whom foreign intelligence information has been communicated:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Authorize
logic summary: Authorizes communication with approval
premise text: (b) in accordance with an approval given under this subsection;
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-linearlogic-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LinearLogic
operator: Imply
logic summary: Implies that the Attorney-General must approve
premise text: may communicate that information to such persons, and in such manner, as are approved in writing by the Attorney-General.
execution surface: modalities::linear
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-ss-3-logic-alleninterval-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Within
logic summary: Limits communication to within approval period
premise text: (3) A person to whom foreign intelligence information has been communicated:
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

138 Employee of carrier may communicate information to
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-138
has part: 138(1) Employee of carrier may communicate information to
has part: 138(2) Employee of carrier may communicate information to
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.31

138(1) Employee of carrier may communicate information to
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-138-ss-1
part of: 138 Employee of carrier may communicate information to
note: Employee must communicate certain information to the authority
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.31
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-138-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-138-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-138-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Must
logic summary: Mandatory obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

138(2) Employee of carrier may communicate information to
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-138-ss-2
part of: 138 Employee of carrier may communicate information to
note: Employee may communicate information to enforcement agency for investigation purposes
description: Lawfully accessed information, stored communications warrant information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.31
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-138-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-138-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-138-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permission to communicate information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

28 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-28
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.32
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-28-norm

139 Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-139
has part: 139(1) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
has part: 139(2) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
has part: 139(3) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
has part: 139(4) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
has part: 139(5) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.32

139(1) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-139-ss-1
part of: 139 Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
note: Communication of lawfully accessed information to another person.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.32
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 139(1) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permission granted.
premise text: Lawful access to information.
conclusion text: Communication allowed.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

139(2) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-139-ss-2
part of: 139 Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
note: Purposes connected with investigation, decision-making, and record-keeping.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.32
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-deontic-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 139(2) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: connectedTo
logic summary: Connected to investigation purposes
premise text: (2) The purposes are purposes connected with:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: During investigation periods
premise text: (b) the making by an authority, body or person of a decision whether or not to begin a proceeding to which subsection (4) applies;
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: During decision-making periods
premise text: (c) a proceeding to which subsection (4) applies;
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-2-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: connectedTo
logic summary: Connected to record-keeping purposes
premise text: (d) the keeping of records by the agency under Part 3-5.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

139(3) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-139-ss-3
part of: 139 Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
note: Prohibition of serious or punishable offences
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.32
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits serious or punishable offences
premise text: (3) A contravention to which this subsection applies is a contravention of a law...
conclusion text: ...render the person committing the contravention liable:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

139(4) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-139-ss-4
part of: 139 Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
note: Excluded proceedings
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.32
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: !
logic summary: Prohibits certain proceedings
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

139(5) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-139-ss-5
part of: 139 Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
note: Defines penalty units for contravention of a law
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.32
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-5-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-5-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-5-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 139(5) Dealing for purposes of investigation etc.
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: defines
logic summary: Defines the meaning of penalty units
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-ss-5-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes a reference to an amount of a fine or pecuniary penalty
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

140 Dealing with information if access suspected to be unlawful
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-140
note: Reporting suspected unlawful access of stored communications to authorities.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.33
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-140-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-140-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-140-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 140 Dealing with information if access suspected to be unlawful
borne by: NaturalPerson
scope note: borne by: NaturalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-140-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Permission to report
premise text: Reasonable grounds suspected
conclusion text: Reporting required
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

30 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-30
note: Communicating intercepted information for specific purposes.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.34
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 30 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Allows communication of intercepted information.
premise text: (2) A person to whom the information is communicated...
conclusion text: ...may communicate to another person, make use of, or make a record of...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Specifies temporal overlap for permitted communication.
premise text: (2) A person to whom the information is communicated...
conclusion text: ...for a purpose (or 2 or more purposes) connected with: ...
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Until
logic summary: Defines temporal scope for permitted communication.
premise text: (2) A person to whom the information is communicated...
conclusion text: ...for a purpose (or 2 or more purposes) connected with: ...
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Diffuses
logic summary: Specifies diffusion of permitted communication.
premise text: (2) A person to whom the information is communicated...
conclusion text: ...for a purpose (or 2 or more purposes) connected with: ...
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Incorporates
logic summary: Defines incorporation of permitted communication.
premise text: (2) A person to whom the information is communicated...
conclusion text: ...for a purpose (or 2 or more purposes) connected with: ...
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

141 Making record for purpose of permitted communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-141
note: Allowing record-making for permitted communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.34
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-141-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-141-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-141-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 141 Making record for purpose of permitted communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-141-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Granting permission to make records
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

142 Further dealing by recipient of certain information
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-142
note: Recipient may communicate or use information for specified purposes.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.34
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-142-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-142-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-142-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 142 Further dealing by recipient of certain information
borne by: NaturalPerson
scope note: borne by: NaturalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-142-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: May
logic summary: Permission to act
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

143 Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-143
has part: 143(1) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
has part: 143(2) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
has part: 143(3) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.34

143(1) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-143-ss-1
part of: 143 Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
note: Giving lawfully accessed information in evidence in exempt proceeding.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.34
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-1-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 143(1) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

143(2) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-143-ss-2
part of: 143 Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
note: Determine on the balance of probabilities whether a stored communication was accessed in contravention of subsection 108(1)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.34
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 143(2) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Determine
logic summary: Obligation determination
premise text: Subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: Accessed in contravention
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

143(3) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-143-ss-3
part of: 143 Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
note: Permits giving stored communications warrant information in exempt proceeding.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.34
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-3-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-ss-3-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 143(3) Giving information in evidence in exempt proceeding
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

144 Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-144
has part: 144(1) Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
has part: 144(2) Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.35

144(1) Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-144-ss-1
part of: 144 Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
note: Allowing access to stored communications in certain circumstances
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.35
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-1-norm

144(2) Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-144-ss-2
part of: 144 Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
note: Prohibiting reference to irregularity in certain contexts
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.35
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-logic-deontic-3

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 144(2) Giving information in evidence if communication unlawfully
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Forbids references to irregularities
premise text: (2) A reference in subsection (1) to an irregularity is a reference to a defect or irregularity:
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Forbids references to irregularities in connection with warrant execution
premise text: (2) A reference in subsection (1) to an irregularity is a reference to a defect or irregularity: (b) in connection with the execution of a warrant, or the purported execution of a document purporting to be a warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-ss-2-logic-deontic-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Forbids references to irregularities in connection with document issuance
premise text: (2) A reference in subsection (1) to an irregularity is a reference to a defect or irregularity: (a) in, or in connection with the issue of, a document purporting to be a warrant; or
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

145 Evidence that has been given in exempt proceeding
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-145
note: Permits reuse of exempt proceeding evidence in other proceedings.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.35
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-145-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-145-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-145-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: PERMIT
logic summary: Allows reuse of exempt proceeding evidence.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

32 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-32
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-32-norm

146 Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-146
has part: 146(1) Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
has part: 146(2) Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36

146(1) Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-146-ss-1
part of: 146 Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
note: Giving information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1) in evidence in a proceeding.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-deontic-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-argumentation-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 146(1) Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
borne by: NaturalPerson
scope note: borne by: NaturalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permission to provide information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1).
premise text: (1) A person may give information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: in evidence in a proceeding by way of an application under section 165 for remedial relief.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlap
logic summary: Temporal overlap between the access and the proceeding.
premise text: (1) A person may give information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: in evidence in a proceeding by way of an application under section 165 for remedial relief.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Recurring
logic summary: Recurring trace of the access and communication in relation to the proceeding.
premise text: (1) A person may give information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: in evidence in a proceeding by way of an application under section 165 for remedial relief.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1).
premise text: (1) A person may give information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: in evidence in a proceeding by way of an application under section 165 for remedial relief.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-1-logic-argumentation-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Argumentation
operator: Justification
logic summary: Justification for providing information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1).
premise text: (a) the access; or (b) the communication (in contravention of section 133)
conclusion text: of information obtained by the access.
execution surface: modalities::argumentation
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

146(2) Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-146-ss-2
part of: 146 Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
note: Permits giving stored communications warrant information in evidence
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-146-ss-2-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 146(2) Giving information in evidence in civil proceedings for remedial
borne by: NaturalPerson
scope note: borne by: NaturalPerson
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

147 Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-147
has part: 147(1) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
has part: 147(2) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
has part: 147(3) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36

147(1) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-147-ss-1
part of: 147 Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
note: Accessed material is inadmissible except as provided
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits accessing material in evidence
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

147(2) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-147-ss-2
part of: 147 Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
note: Accessed material is admissible under certain conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 147(2) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide accessed material under certain conditions.
premise text: (2) Subsection (1) of this section applies...
conclusion text: ...stored communication was accessed in contravention of subsection 108(1).
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: interval relation
logic summary: Defines the temporal interval for accessing stored communication.
premise text: (2) Subsection (1) of this section applies...
conclusion text: ...stored communication was accessed in contravention of subsection 108(1).
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: trace relation
logic summary: Establishes a trace between accessing stored communication and its admissibility.
premise text: (2) Subsection (1) of this section applies...
conclusion text: ...stored communication was accessed in contravention of subsection 108(1).
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: diffusion relation
logic summary: Diffuses the obligation to provide accessed material under certain conditions.
premise text: (2) Subsection (1) of this section applies...
conclusion text: ...stored communication was accessed in contravention of subsection 108(1).
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-2-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: cognitive agent relation
logic summary: Involves a cognitive agent in the provision of accessed material under certain conditions.
premise text: (2) Subsection (1) of this section applies...
conclusion text: ...stored communication was accessed in contravention of subsection 108(1).
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

147(3) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-147-ss-3
part of: 147 Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
note: Information obtained by access is admissible in evidence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 147(3) Accessed material inadmissible except as provided
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-147-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: State obligation to provide admissible information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

148 Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-148
has part: 148(1) Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
has part: 148(2) Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36

148(1) Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-148-ss-1
part of: 148 Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
note: Stored communications warrant information is admissible in evidence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-148-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-148-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-148-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 148(1) Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-148-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: admits
logic summary: Admission of stored communications warrant information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

148(2) Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-148-ss-2
part of: 148 Stored communications warrant information inadmissible
note: Permits giving stored communications warrant information in evidence
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.36
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-148-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-148-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-148-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: PERMIT
logic summary: Allows action
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

149 Evidence that is otherwise inadmissible
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-149
note: Exemptions from admissibility of evidence
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.37
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-149-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-149-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-149-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: exemption
logic summary: Exempts certain types of evidence from admissibility
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

150 Destruction of records
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-150
note: Destroy stored communications if not required for a purpose.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.37
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 150 Destruction of records
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits destruction of records if required for a purpose.
premise text: (a) information, or a record, that was obtained by accessing a stored communication...
conclusion text: ...the chief officer must cause the information or record to be destroyed forthwith.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Temporal Interval
logic summary: Defines a temporal interval for destruction of records.
premise text: (1) If: (a) information, or a record, that was obtained by accessing a stored communication...
conclusion text: ...the chief officer must cause the information or record to be destroyed forthwith.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Temporal Trace
logic summary: Defines a temporal trace for destruction of records.
premise text: (1) If: (a) information, or a record, that was obtained by accessing a stored communication...
conclusion text: ...the chief officer must cause the information or record to be destroyed forthwith.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Information Flow
logic summary: Defines an information flow for destruction of records.
premise text: (a) information, or a record, that was obtained by accessing a stored communication...
conclusion text: ...the chief officer must cause the information or record to be destroyed forthwith.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-150-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Knowledge Representation
logic summary: Defines a knowledge representation for destruction of records.
premise text: (b) the chief officer of the agency is satisfied that the information or record...
conclusion text: ...the chief officer must cause the information or record to be destroyed forthwith.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

34 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-34
note: Chief officer must provide a written report to the Minister within 3 months after each June 30th.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.38
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-34-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-34-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-34-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 34 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-34-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Expresses a duty
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

151 Enforcement agencies to keep documents connected with issue
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-151
note: Enforcement agency must keep documents connected with issue.
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.38
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-151-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-151-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-151-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 151 Enforcement agencies to keep documents connected with issue
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-151-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide documents
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

152 Functions of Ombudsman
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-152
note: Inspect enforcement agency records to ascertain compliance with sections 150 and 151.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.38
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-152-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-152-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-152-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 152 Functions of Ombudsman
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-152-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: has
logic summary: Obligation to inspect records
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

153 Reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-153
has part: 153(1) Reports
has part: 153(2) Reports
has part: 153(3) Reports
has part: 153(4) Reports
has part: 153(5) Reports
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39

153(1) Reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-153-ss-1
part of: 153 Reports
note: The Ombudsman must report to the Minister in writing about the results of inspections.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 153(1) Reports
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to report
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

153(2) Reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-153-ss-2
part of: 153 Reports
note: Must provide reports to the Minister within 3 months after the end of the financial year.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 153(2) Reports
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST PROVIDE
logic summary: Must provide reports to the Minister within 3 months after the end of the financial year.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

153(3) Reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-153-ss-3
part of: 153 Reports
note: Ombudsman may report contravention of Act provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 153(3) Reports
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Obligation to report contravention
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

153(4) Reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-153-ss-4
part of: 153 Reports
note: The Ombudsman must report to the Minister in writing about the results of an inspection.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 153(4) Reports
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to report
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

153(5) Reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-153-ss-5
part of: 153 Reports
note: The Ombudsman must provide a report to the chief officer of the enforcement agency.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-5-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-5-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-5-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 153(5) Reports
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-153-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to provide a report
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

154 Ombudsman’s general powers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-154
has part: 154(1) Ombudsman’s general powers
has part: 154(2) Ombudsman’s general powers
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39

154(1) Ombudsman’s general powers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-154-ss-1
part of: 154 Ombudsman’s general powers
note: Ombudsman's powers under the Ombudsman Act 1976 extend to an inspection by the Ombudsman.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 154(1) Ombudsman’s general powers
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: extends
logic summary: Extension of powers
premise text: Ombudsman's general powers
conclusion text: Ombudsman's powers under the Ombudsman Act 1976 extend to an inspection by the Ombudsman.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal extension of powers
premise text: Ombudsman's general powers
conclusion text: Ombudsman's powers under the Ombudsman Act 1976 extend to an inspection by the Ombudsman.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal extension of powers
premise text: Ombudsman's general powers
conclusion text: Ombudsman's powers under the Ombudsman Act 1976 extend to an inspection by the Ombudsman.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal extension of powers
premise text: Ombudsman's general powers
conclusion text: Ombudsman's powers under the Ombudsman Act 1976 extend to an inspection by the Ombudsman.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-1-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal extension of powers
premise text: Ombudsman's general powers
conclusion text: Ombudsman's powers under the Ombudsman Act 1976 extend to an inspection by the Ombudsman.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

154(2) Ombudsman’s general powers
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-154-ss-2
part of: 154 Ombudsman’s general powers
note: Exercise of powers under Ombudsman Act 1976 is taken as an exercise of powers under the Ombudsman.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 154(2) Ombudsman’s general powers
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-154-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: takes
logic summary: Exercise of powers is taken as an exercise
premise text: Ombudsman Act 1976
conclusion text: Ombudsman's general powers
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

155 Ombudsman to be given information etc. despite other laws
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-155
note: An officer of an enforcement agency must provide information despite other laws.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.39
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-155-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-155-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-155-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 155 Ombudsman to be given information etc. despite other laws
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-155-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

36 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-36
note: Giving information to an inspecting officer and access to agency records for inspection purposes.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 36 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: OBLIGES
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the agency to provide information and access records.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

156 Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-156
has part: 156(1) Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
has part: 156(2) Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40

156(1) Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-156-ss-1
part of: 156 Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
note: Inspecting officer may communicate, use, or record information for inspection purposes.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-156-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-156-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-156-ss-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 156(1) Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-156-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Permission to communicate, use, or record information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

156(2) Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-156-ss-2
part of: 156 Dealing with information for the purposes of inspection and
note: Section 156(2) has effect despite other laws.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-156-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-156-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-156-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: obligation
logic summary: Obligation to have effect despite other laws.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

157 Application of Ombudsman Act
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-157
has part: 157(1) Application of Ombudsman Act
has part: 157(2) Application of Ombudsman Act
has part: 157(3) Application of Ombudsman Act
has part: 157(8) Application of Ombudsman Act
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40

157(1) Application of Ombudsman Act
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-157-ss-1
part of: 157 Application of Ombudsman Act
note: Section 11A of the Ombudsman Act 1976 does not apply in relation to the exercise or proposed exercise of a power, or the performance or the proposed performance of a function, of the Ombudsman under this Division.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-argumentation-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Exclusion
logic summary: Section 11A is excluded from the Ombudsman's powers and functions.
premise text: (1) Section 11A of the Ombudsman Act 1976 does not apply in relation to...
conclusion text: ...the exercise or proposed exercise of a power, or the performance or the proposed performance of a function, of the Ombudsman under this Division.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: TemporalExclusion
logic summary: Section 11A is excluded from the Ombudsman's powers and functions during its application.
premise text: (1) Section 11A of the Ombudsman Act 1976 does not apply in relation to...
conclusion text: ...the exercise or proposed exercise of a power, or the performance or the proposed performance of a function, of the Ombudsman under this Division.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: TemporalExclusion
logic summary: Section 11A is excluded from the Ombudsman's powers and functions during its application.
premise text: (1) Section 11A of the Ombudsman Act 1976 does not apply in relation to...
conclusion text: ...the exercise or proposed exercise of a power, or the performance or the proposed performance of a function, of the Ombudsman under this Division.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-1-logic-argumentation-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Argumentation
operator: Exclusion
logic summary: Section 11A is excluded from the Ombudsman's powers and functions.
premise text: (1) Section 11A of the Ombudsman Act 1976 does not apply in relation to...
conclusion text: ...the exercise or proposed exercise of a power, or the performance or the proposed performance of a function, of the Ombudsman under this Division.
execution surface: modalities::argumentation
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

157(2) Application of Ombudsman Act
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-157-ss-2
part of: 157 Application of Ombudsman Act
note: Excluding references to actions of an inspecting officer under Division.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 157(2) Application of Ombudsman Act
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

157(3) Application of Ombudsman Act
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-157-ss-3
part of: 157 Application of Ombudsman Act
note: Subject to section 155 of this Act, subsections 35(2), (3), (4) and
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-3-norm

157(8) Application of Ombudsman Act
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-157-ss-8
part of: 157 Application of Ombudsman Act
note: Application of Ombudsman Act to Division
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.40
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-157-ss-8-norm

158 Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-158
has part: 158(1) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
has part: 158(2) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
has part: 158(3) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.41

158(1) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-158-ss-1
part of: 158 Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
note: The Ombudsman must provide information to a State inspecting authority.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.41
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 158(1) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST PROVIDE
logic summary: Obligation to provide information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

158(2) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-158-ss-2
part of: 158 Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
note: Ombudsman must provide information to authorities under certain conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.41
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 158(2) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to provide information
premise text: Ombudsman has discretion
conclusion text: Authority must receive information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

158(3) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-158-ss-3
part of: 158 Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
note: Ombudsman may receive information from State
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.41
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 158(3) Exchange of information between Ombudsman and State
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-158-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Permission to receive information
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

38 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-38
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.42
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-38-norm

159 Annual reports regarding applications and warrants under
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-159
note: Annual reports regarding applications and warrants under
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.42
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-159-norm

30 June; and
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-30-2
note: Agency's records can be used to derive a report.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.42
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 30 June; and
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: can
logic summary: Derivation obligation
premise text: Agency's records can be used.
conclusion text: Report can be derived.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

160 Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-160
has part: 160(1) Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
has part: 160(2) Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.42

160(1) Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-160-ss-1
part of: 160 Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
note: Minister may request specified information from chief officer of an enforcement agency.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.42
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-160-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-160-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-160-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Minister has an obligation to request specified information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

160(2) Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-160-ss-2
part of: 160 Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
note: Minister must comply with request for information from Commonwealth.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.42
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-160-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-160-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-160-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 160(2) Minister may seek further information from Commonwealth
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-160-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to comply with request.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

161 Annual report by Minister about stored communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-161
note: Annual report by Minister about stored communications
description: yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.43
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-161-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-161-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-161-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to provide annual report
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

162 Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-162
has part: 162(1) Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
has part: 162(2) Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.43

162(1) Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-162-ss-1
part of: 162 Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
note: Report statistics on stored communications warrant applications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.43
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 162(1) Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must report statistics
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

162(2) Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-162-ss-2
part of: 162 Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
note: Report on stored communications warrants applications and statistics
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.43
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 162(2) Report to set out how many applications made and warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-162-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must provide report
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

163 Report to contain information about effectiveness of warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-163
note: Report must provide information about arrests made on lawful accessed information
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.43
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-163-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-163-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-163-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 163 Report to contain information about effectiveness of warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-163-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to report
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

40 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-40
note: Duty to report unlawfully accessed information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-40-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-40-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-40-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 40 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-40-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: obligation
logic summary: Obligation to report
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

164 Annual reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-164
has part: 164(1) Annual reports
has part: 164(2) Annual reports
has part: 164(3) Annual reports
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44

164(1) Annual reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-164-ss-1
part of: 164 Annual reports
note: Minister must cause annual report to be laid before Parliament within 15 sitting days.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to perform action
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

164(2) Annual reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-164-ss-2
part of: 164 Annual reports
note: Annual reports must not be made in a manner that enables the identification of a person.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-2-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 164(2) Annual reports
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition
premise text: Annual reports must not be made in a manner that enables the identification of a person.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

164(3) Annual reports
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-164-ss-3
part of: 164 Annual reports
note: Annual reports must be given to the Minister.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 164(3) Annual reports
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-164-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

165 Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-165
has part: 165(1) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
has part: 165(2) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
has part: 165(3) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
has part: 165(4) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
has part: 165(5) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
has part: 165(6) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44

165(1) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-165-ss-1
part of: 165 Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
note: Prohibition on unlawful access or communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-deontic-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Forbids accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Subsection 108(1) prohibits accessing a stored communication
conclusion text: Accessing is prohibited
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Accessing during contravention of subsection 108(1)
premise text: The access was in contravention of subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: The access must be during the prohibited period
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: Accessing during contravention of subsection 108(1) is prohibited
premise text: The access was in contravention of subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: The access must be during the prohibited period
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-1-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbids
logic summary: Forbids accessing a stored communication if the access was in contravention of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Subsection 108(1) prohibits accessing a stored communication
conclusion text: The access must be forbidden
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

165(2) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-165-ss-2
part of: 165 Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
note: Person is an aggrieved person if they were a party to the communication or the communication was made on their behalf.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-logic-ltl-3

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 165(2) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: is
logic summary: Person is an aggrieved person
premise text: (a) the person was a party to the communication; or (b) the communication was made on the person’s behalf.
conclusion text: The person is an aggrieved person
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: is
logic summary: Person is an aggrieved person if they were a party to the communication or the communication was made on their behalf
premise text: (2) For the purposes of this section, a person is an aggrieved person if, and only if: (a) the person was a party to the communication; or (b) the communication was made on the person’s behalf.
conclusion text: The person is an aggrieved person
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: and
logic summary: Person is an aggrieved person if they were a party to the communication or the communication was made on their behalf
premise text: (2) For the purposes of this section, a person is an aggrieved person if, and only if: (a) the person was a party to the communication; or (b) the communication was made on the person’s behalf.
conclusion text: The person is an aggrieved person
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

165(3) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-165-ss-3
part of: 165 Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
note: Remedial relief for unlawful access or communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 165(3) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide remedial relief
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

165(4) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-165-ss-4
part of: 165 Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
note: Remedial relief for unlawful access or communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-4-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 165(4) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide remedial relief
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

165(5) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-165-ss-5
part of: 165 Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
note: Court may grant remedial relief to an aggrieved person if convicted of unlawful access or communication.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-5-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-5-logic-deontic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-5-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 165(5) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-5-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide remedial relief
premise text: Court conviction
conclusion text: Remedial relief granted
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-5-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: permission
logic summary: Permission to provide remedial relief
premise text: Court discretion
conclusion text: Remedial relief permitted
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

165(6) Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-165-ss-6
part of: 165 Civil remedies—unlawful access or communication
note: Prohibition on unlawful access or communication
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.44
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-6-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-6-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-165-ss-6-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits unlawful access or communication
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

42 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-42
has part: 42(7) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 42(8) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 42(9) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 42(10) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
has part: 42(11) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.46

42(7) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-42-ss-7
part of: 42 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Access or communication of information is unlawful without court order.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.46
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-7-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-7-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-7-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits access or communication of information.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

42(8) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-42-ss-8
part of: 42 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Court may make order with necessary provisions and terms and conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.46
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-8-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-8-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-8-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: may
logic summary: Permission to make order
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

42(9) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-42-ss-9
part of: 42 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Punitive damages prohibited
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.46
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-9-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-9-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-9-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits punitive damages
premise text: (9) A court may revoke or vary an order in the nature of an injunction made by the court under this section.
conclusion text: Punitive damages are prohibited.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

42(10) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-42-ss-10
part of: 42 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Reference to punitive damages included in damages calculation.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.46
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-10-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-10-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-10-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-10-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Inclusion of punitive damages
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-10-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: refers to
logic summary: Reference to punitive damages
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

42(11) Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-42-ss-11
part of: 42 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
note: Exemptions from interception for issuing or executing a warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.46
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-11-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-11-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-ss-11-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: Prohibits certain actions
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

166 Limitation periods etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-166
has part: 166(1) Limitation periods etc.
has part: 166(2) Limitation periods etc.
has part: 166(3) Limitation periods etc.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.47

166(1) Limitation periods etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-166-ss-1
part of: 166 Limitation periods etc.
note: Application for remedial relief must be made within 6 years after access took place.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.47
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 166(1) Limitation periods etc.
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Application must be made within 6 years
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

166(2) Limitation periods etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-166-ss-2
part of: 166 Limitation periods etc.
note: Application for remedial relief must be made within 6 years after communication.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.47
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 166(2) Limitation periods etc.
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Application must be made within 6 years.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

166(3) Limitation periods etc.
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-166-ss-3
part of: 166 Limitation periods etc.
note: Application for remedial relief must be made as soon as practicable after conviction.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.47
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 166(3) Limitation periods etc.
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-166-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to make application as soon as practicable after conviction.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

44 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-44
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.48
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-44-norm

167 No limitation on other liability
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-167
has part: 167(1) No limitation on other liability
has part: 167(2) No limitation on other liability
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.48

167(1) No limitation on other liability
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-167-ss-1
part of: 167 No limitation on other liability
note: No limitation on other liability
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.48
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Implies
logic summary: No limitation implies obligation
premise text: (1) This Part does not limit any liability (whether criminal or civil)
conclusion text: A person has no liability under this Act
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Implies
logic summary: No limitation implies obligation to provide remedial relief
premise text: (1) This Part does not limit any liability (whether criminal or civil)
conclusion text: A person must provide remedial relief even if convicted of an offence
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Implies
logic summary: No limitation implies obligation to provide remedial relief for other liabilities
premise text: (1) This Part does not limit any liability (whether criminal or civil)
conclusion text: A person must provide remedial relief even if they have other liabilities under this Act or other laws
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Implies
logic summary: No limitation implies obligation to provide remedial relief for all liabilities
premise text: (1) This Part does not limit any liability (whether criminal or civil)
conclusion text: A person must provide remedial relief even if they have other liabilities under this Act or other laws, regardless of whether they are convicted of an offence
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-1-logic-deontic-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Implies
logic summary: No limitation implies obligation to provide remedial relief for all types of liability
premise text: (1) This Part does not limit any liability (whether criminal or civil)
conclusion text: A person must provide remedial relief even if they have other liabilities under this Act or other laws, regardless of whether they are convicted of an offence and regardless of the type of liability
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

167(2) No limitation on other liability
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-167-ss-2
part of: 167 No limitation on other liability
note: No limitation on other liability for making an application under subsection 165(3) or (4)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.48
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-2-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 167(2) No limitation on other liability
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-167-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permits
logic summary: Allows making an application despite a conviction
premise text: None
conclusion text: None
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

168 Concurrent operation of State and Territory laws
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-168
note: No exclusion or limitation of State/Territory laws
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.48
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-168-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-168-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-168-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: No exclusion or limitation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

169 State or Territory courts—jurisdictional limits
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-169
note: No inferior court can grant remedial relief beyond its jurisdiction.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.48
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-169-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-169-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-169-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Cannot
logic summary: Prohibition on granting remedial relief
premise text: Court's jurisdictional limits
conclusion text: No remedial relief
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

170 Extended meaning of conviction—orders under section 19B of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-170
note: A reference in this Part to the conviction of a person of an offence includes a reference to the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.48
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-deontic-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-descriptionlogic-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-deontic-5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-descriptionlogic-6

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 170 Extended meaning of conviction—orders under section 19B of
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914.
premise text: A reference in this Part to the conviction of a person of an offence includes a reference to the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
conclusion text: The making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 is included.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914.
premise text: A reference in this Part to the conviction of a person of an offence includes a reference to the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
conclusion text: The making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 is included.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-deontic-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes the reference to the conviction of a person of an offence.
premise text: A reference in this Part to the conviction of a person of an offence includes a reference to the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
conclusion text: The reference to the conviction of a person of an offence is included.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-descriptionlogic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes the reference to the conviction of a person of an offence.
premise text: A reference in this Part to the conviction of a person of an offence includes a reference to the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
conclusion text: The reference to the conviction of a person of an offence is included.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-deontic-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
premise text: A reference in this Part to the conviction of a person of an offence includes a reference to the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
conclusion text: The making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence is included.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-170-logic-descriptionlogic-6
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
premise text: A reference in this Part to the conviction of a person of an offence includes a reference to the making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence.
conclusion text: The making of an order under section 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 in relation to a person in respect of an offence is included.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10 Paragraph (d) of Schedule 1
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-10-2
note: Replace outdated telecommunications interception legislation with updated Act.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.49
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-10-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the legislative body to update the Act.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

11 Subsection 19A(5)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-11
note: Omit section 63 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 and substitute sections 63 and 133 of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.49
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-11-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-11-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-11-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligate
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the legislative body to omit section 63 and substitute sections 63 and 133.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

12 Schedule 1
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-12-2
note: Omit specified section and substitute with new sections.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.49
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-12-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-12-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 12 Schedule 1
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

13 Paragraph 17(1)(e)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-13
note: Replace outdated act with new one
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.49
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-13-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-13-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-13-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the legislative body to replace the outdated act
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

14 Subsection 26(8)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-14-2
note: Omit and substitute an Act
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.49
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-14-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-14-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-14-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

15 Subsection 27A(5)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-15
note: Replace outdated telecommunications interception act with new one.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.49
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-15-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-15-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-15-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 15 Subsection 27A(5)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-15-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the state to replace outdated legislation.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

46 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-46
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-46-norm

16 Subitems 31(1) and (2) of Schedule 1
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-16-2
note: Substitute Act name in Schedule 1
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 16 Subitems 31(1) and (2) of Schedule 1
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-16-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes duty on State to substitute Act name
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

17 Section 473.1 of the Criminal Code (definition of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-17
note: Definition of interception device updated
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-17-norm

18 Subsection 474.4(2) of the Criminal Code
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-18-2
note: Substitution of Act name
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-18-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes an obligation to substitute the Act name
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

19 Paragraph 476.5(2A)(a) of the Criminal Code
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-19
note: Omit specified section of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 and substitute with another section.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-19-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-19-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-19-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty to omit the specified section.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

20 Schedule 3
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-20-2
note: Replace a section with another
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 20 Schedule 3
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

20A Paragraph 14(2A)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-20a
note: Substitute Part 2-2 of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 for Part III of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20a-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20a-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20a-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 20A Paragraph 14(2A)(a)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-20a-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Substitute
logic summary: Replace existing provision with new one
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

21 Subsection 17(6)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-21
note: Substitute Act name
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.50
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-21-norm

22 Subsection 13A(6) (definition of material lawfully obtained
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-22-2
note: Omit and substitute laws
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.51
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-22-2-norm

23 Subsection 18(7)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-23
note: Replace outdated telecommunications interception act with new one.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.51
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-23-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-23-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-23-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Replaces an outdated obligation.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

24 Subsection 32(4)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24-2
note: Replace outdated telecommunications act with new one.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.51
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the legislative body to update the act.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

24A Section 5
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24a
note: Replace outdated telecommunications interception act with new one.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.51
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24a-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24a-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24a-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the legislative body to replace the act.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

48 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-48
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-48-norm

24B Subsection 313(7)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24b
note: Substitute term in subsection 313(7)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24b-norm

24C Subsection 313(7)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24c
note: Omit specified phrase and substitute with alternative phrase.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24c-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24c-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24c-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits the use of a specific phrase.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

24D Subsection 313(8)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24d
note: Substitute 'interception or access services' for 'interception services'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24d-norm

24E Subsection 313(8)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24e
note: Insertion of 'or accessed' after 'intercepted'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24e-norm

24F Subsection 324(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24f
note: Substitute Act name
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24f-norm

24G Section 332K (note)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-24g
note: Replace outdated telecommunications interception act with new one.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24g-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24g-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-24g-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the legislative body to replace the act.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

25 Title
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-25
note: Prohibit access to interception and other access.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-25-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-25-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-25-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Prohibits access.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

26 Part I (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-26-2
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new chapter title
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-26-2-norm

27 Section 1
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-27
note: Insert 'and Access' after 'Interception'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.52
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-27-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-27-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-27-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: INSERTS
logic summary: Insertion of text
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

28 Part IA (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-28-2
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.53
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-28-2-norm

29 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-29
note: Defines access in relation to a stored communication.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.53
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-29-norm

30 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-30-3
note: Defines accessible in relation to a communication.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.53
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-30-3-norm

31 Subsection 5(1) (definition of agency)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-31
note: Definition of agency modified
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.53
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-31-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-31-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-31-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-31-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 31 Subsection 5(1) (definition of agency)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-31-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Modify
logic summary: Modifies the definition of agency
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-31-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Substitute
logic summary: Substitutes a new definition for agency
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

32 Subsection 5(1) (at the end of the definition of certifying
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-32-2
note: List of officers who can certify stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.53
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-32-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-32-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-32-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 32 Subsection 5(1) (at the end of the definition of certifying
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-32-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: hasPartOf
logic summary: List of authorized officers
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

50 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-50
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-50-norm

33 Subsection 5(1) (at the end of the definition of chief
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-33
note: Chief executive officer or acting chief executive officer of an agency must be added to the definition of chief officer.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-33-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-33-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-33-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 33 Subsection 5(1) (at the end of the definition of chief
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-33-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: addition
logic summary: Adding a condition to a definition.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

34 Subsection 5(1) (definition of designated warrant
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-34-2
note: Repeal definition of designated warrant information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-34-2-norm

35 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-35
note: Defines 'emergency service facility'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-35-norm

36 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-36-2
note: Defines enforcement agency and its scope
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 36 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: is defined as
logic summary: Defines term
conclusion text: enforcement agency has the same meaning as in section 282 of the Telecommunications Act 1997
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-36-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: includes
logic summary: Includes interception agencies and eligible authorities
conclusion text: and includes an interception agency and an eligible authority of a State
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

37 Subsection 5(1) (definition of foreign communications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-37
note: Omit 'a warrant', substitute 'an interception warrant'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-37-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-37-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-37-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: prohibition
logic summary: Prohibition of using the term 'warrant'
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

38 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-38-2
note: Defines intended recipient of a communication.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-38-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-38-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 38 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

39 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-39
note: Definition of interception agency
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.54
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-39-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-39-logic-descriptionlogic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-39-logic-deontic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-39-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 39 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-39-logic-descriptionlogic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: type
logic summary: Class hierarchy
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-39-logic-deontic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: Definition of agency
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

40 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-40-2
note: Definition of interception warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.55
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-40-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-40-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 40 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

41 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-41
note: Definition of interception warrant information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.55
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-41-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-41-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-41-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 41 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-41-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: defines
logic summary: Defines the meaning of interception warrant information
premise text: Section 6EA
conclusion text: Section 41(1)
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

42 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-42-2
note: Definition of issuing authority
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.55
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 42 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligate
logic summary: Definition of issuing authority
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-42-2-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: definition
logic summary: Defines a term for the purpose of clarity
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

43 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-43
note: Accessing information without contravention of subsection 108(1) is prohibited.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.55
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-ltl-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-diffusion-5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-cogai-6

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 43 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits accessing information without contravention of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Subsection 108(1) exists
conclusion text: Accessing information without contravention is prohibited
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classify
logic summary: Classifies 'lawfully accessed information' as information obtained by accessing a stored communication in contravention of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Definition of 'lawfully accessed information'
conclusion text: Information is classified based on its origin
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: The temporal interval of accessing information without contravention overlaps with the temporal interval of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Temporal intervals exist for accessing information and subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: Temporal intervals overlap
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Traces
logic summary: The trace of accessing information without contravention is related to the trace of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Traces exist for accessing information and subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: Traces are related
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-diffusion-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Diffuses
logic summary: The diffusion of accessing information without contravention is affected by the diffusion of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Diffusions exist for accessing information and subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: Diffusions are affected
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-43-logic-cogai-6
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Infer
logic summary: The inference of accessing information without contravention is based on the inference of subsection 108(1)
premise text: Inferences exist for accessing information and subsection 108(1)
conclusion text: Inference is based
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

44 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-44-2
note: Defines 'lawfully intercepted information'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.55
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-44-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-44-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 44 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

45 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-45
note: Insert Schedule 1 Stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.55
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-45-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-45-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-45-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: INSERT
logic summary: Insertion of schedule
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

52 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-52
note: Definition of 'listening device' for Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-52-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-52-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-52-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: definition
logic summary: Defines a term for legal purposes
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

46 Subsection 5(1) (definition of named person warrant)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-46-2
note: Omit 'a warrant', substitute 'an interception warrant'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-46-2-norm

47 Subsection 5(1) (definition of nominated AAT member)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-47
note: Omit 'Part VI', substitute 'Part 2-5'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-47-norm

48 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-48-2
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-48-2-norm

49 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-49
note: Insert clause
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-49-norm

50 Subsection 5(1) (definition of Part III warrant)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-50-2
note: Repeal definition of Part III warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-50-2-norm

51 Subsection 5(1) (definition of Part VI warrant)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-51
note: Repeal definition of Part VI warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-51-norm

52 Subsection 5(1) (at the end of the definition of passing
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-52-2
note: Add a note about when a communication is passing over a telecommunications system.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-52-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-52-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-52-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: add
logic summary: Adds a note to the definition of passing over a telecommunications system.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

53 Subsection 5(1) (definition of permitted purpose)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-53
note: Permits substitution of 'interception agency' for 'agency'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-53-norm

54 Subsection 5(1) (subparagraph (a)(v) of the definition of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-54
note: Omit “Part VIII”, substitute “Part 2-7”.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-54-norm

55 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (b) of the definition of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-55
note: An offence against subsection 108(1) or section 133 is a prescribed offence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.56
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-55-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-55-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-55-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 55 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (b) of the definition of
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-55-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: implies
logic summary: Prescribed offence implies obligation.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

56 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-56
note: Definition of publicly-listed ASIO number
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.57
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-56-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-56-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-56-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 56 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-56-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: definition
logic summary: Defines a term
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

57 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-57
note: Definition of serious contravention
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.57
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-57-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-57-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-57-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 57 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-57-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: definition
logic summary: Defines a term with legal meaning
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

58 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-58
note: Definition of stored communications warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.57
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-58-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-58-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-58-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 58 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-58-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: is defined as
logic summary: Defines the term
conclusion text: stored communications warrant means a warrant issued under Chapter 3.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

59 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-59
note: Definition of stored communications warrant information
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.57
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-59-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-59-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-59-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 59 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-59-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: definition
logic summary: Defines key term
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

60 Subsection 5(1) (definition of telecommunications service
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-60
note: Omit 'a warrant', substitute 'an interception warrant'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.57
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-60-norm

61 Subsection 5(1) (definition of telephone application)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-61
note: Omit 'Part VI warrant' and substitute with 'Part 2-5 warrant or a stored communications warrant'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.57
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-61-norm

62 Subsection 5(1) (definition of warrant)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-62
note: Definition of warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.57
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-62-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-62-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-62-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-62-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: definition
logic summary: Defines warrant
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-62-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: class hierarchy
logic summary: Classifies warrant into types
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

54 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-54-2
note: No interception warrant issued in Chapter 2 (except Part 2-5) after commencement.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.58
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-54-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-54-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-54-2-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 54 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-54-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits interception warrant issuance
premise text: (b) in Chapter 2 (except in Part 2-5)—an interception warrant
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

63 Section 5B
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-63
note: Insertion of '(1)' before 'A reference in this Act'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.58
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-63-norm

64 At the end of section 5B
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-64
note: References to certain proceedings are excluded from exemptions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.58
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-64-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-64-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-64-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-64-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Exclusion
logic summary: Excluded references cannot be exempted.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-64-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: ClassInclusion
logic summary: References are included in the list of excluded references.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

65 Subsection 5C(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-65
note: Omit 'Part VIII', substitute 'Part 2-7 or 3-5'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-65-norm

66 Subsection 6(2A)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-66
note: Modify definition of emergency service facility
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-66-norm

67 Subsection 6(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-67
note: Substitute 'A' for 'In this section, a'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-67-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-67-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-67-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes an obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

68 Subsections 6DA(1) and (4)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-68
note: Omit 'Part VI', substitute 'Part 2-5 or 3-3'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-68-norm

69 Subsection 6E(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-69
note: Modify subsection (2)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-69-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-69-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-69-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Modification
logic summary: Change to subsection (2)
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

70 Subsections 6E(1) and (2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-70
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-70-norm

71 Subsection 6E(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-71
note: Repeal subsection
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-71-norm

72 Section 6EA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-72
note: Omit 'designated warrant information', substitute 'interception warrant information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-72-norm

73 Section 6EA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-73
note: Omit 'a warrant' and substitute 'an interception warrant'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.59
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-73-norm

56 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-56-2
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-56-2-norm

74 Section 6H
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-74
note: Substitute Part 2-5 for Part VI
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-74-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-74-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 74 Section 6H
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

75 Paragraph 6H(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-75
note: Substitute warrant part
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-75-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-75-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-75-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Substitution
logic summary: Replace warrant part
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

76 At the end of section 6H
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-76
note: Add paragraph 116(1)(d) to section 6H
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-76-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-76-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 76 At the end of section 6H
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

77 Paragraph 6L(1)(c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-77
note: Substitute paragraph 5B(1)(c) for paragraph 5B(c)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-77-norm

78 Paragraph 6L(1)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-78
note: Substitute paragraph 5B(1)(d) for paragraph 5B(d)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-78-norm

79 Part II (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-79
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new chapter title
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-79-norm

80 Paragraph 7(2)(ad)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-80
note: Repeal a paragraph
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-80-norm

81 Subsections 7(3) and (3A)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-81
note: Repeal subsections
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-81-norm

82 Paragraphs 7(4)(c) and (5)(c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-82
note: Omit “Part VI warrant”, substitute ‘Part 2-5 warrant’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-82-norm

83 Subsections 7(6) and (6A)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-83
note: Omit 'Part VI warrant', substitute 'Part 2-5 warrant'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.60
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-83-norm

84 Paragraphs 7(10)(b) and (c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-84
note: Omit “Part VI warrant”, substitute ‘Part 2-5 warrant’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-84-norm

85 Part III (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-85
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-85-norm

86 Subsection 12(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-86
note: Omit 'Part III warrants', substitute 'Part 2-2 warrants'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-86-norm

87 Section 13
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-87
note: Substitute warrant in Part III with warrant in Part 2-2.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-87-norm

88 Paragraph 14(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-88
note: Substitute warrant terminology
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-88-norm

89 Subsection 15(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-89
note: Omit 'Part III warrant', substitute 'Part 2-2 warrant'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-89-norm

90 Subsection 17(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-90
note: Omit ‘Part III warrant’, substitute ‘Part 2-2 warrant’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-90-norm

91 Part V (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-91
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-91-norm

92 Part VI (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-92
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.61
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-92-norm

58 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-58-2
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-58-2-norm

93 Subparagraph 35(1)(d)(i)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-93
note: Omit “Part IX”, substitute ‘Part 2-8’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-93-norm

94 Paragraph 53(1)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-94
note: Substitute warrant part
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-94-norm

95 Subsection 55(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-95
note: Omit “Part VI warrant”, substitute ‘Part 2-5 warrant’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-95-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-95-logic-alleninterval-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-95-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Applicable
logic summary: Requires relation between temporal intervals
premise text: Omit ‘Part VI warrant’ and substitute ‘Part 2-5 warrant’
conclusion text: Temporal interval classification
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

96 Paragraph 61(4)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-96
note: Substitute warrant part
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-96-norm

97 Part VII (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-97
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-97-norm

98 Subsection 63(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-98
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-98-norm

99 Subsection 63(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-99
note: Replace 'designated warrant information' with 'interception warrant information'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-99-norm

100 Section 63AA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-100
note: Replace section headings with new ones.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-100-norm

101 Section 63AA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-101
note: Omit 'designated warrant information' and substitute 'interception warrant information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.62
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-101-norm

102 Subsections 63B(3) and (4)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-102
note: Omit 'designated warrant information', substitute 'interception warrant information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-102-norm

103 Paragraph 64(1)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-103
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-103-norm

104 Paragraph 64(1)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-104
note: Repeal paragraph and substitute with new provision.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-104-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-104-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 104 Paragraph 64(1)(b)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

105 Paragraphs 65(1)(a) and (b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-105
note: Repeal paragraphs and substitute with new provisions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-105-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-105-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-105-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 105 Paragraphs 65(1)(a) and (b)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-105-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Repeal
logic summary: Obligation to repeal paragraphs.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

106 Paragraph 65A(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-106
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-106-norm

107 Paragraph 65A(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-107
note: Repeal paragraph, substitute with new provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-107-norm

108 Paragraph 67(1)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-108-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-108-2-norm

109 Paragraph 67(1)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-109-2
note: Repeal paragraph, substitute with new provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 109 Paragraph 67(1)(b)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-109-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Repeal
logic summary: Obligation to repeal paragraph
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

110 Paragraph 67(2)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-110-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-110-2-norm

111 Paragraph 67(2)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-111-2
note: Stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.63
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-111-2-norm

60 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-60-2
note: Repeal and substitute a paragraph with new interception warrant information.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-60-2-norm

112 Section 68
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-112-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-112-2-norm

113 Section 68
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-113-2
note: Omit 'designated warrant information', substitute 'interception warrant information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-113-2-norm

114 Subsection 74(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-114-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-114-2-norm

115 Subsections 74(3), 76(2) and 76A(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-115-2
note: Omit 'designated warrant information', substitute 'interception warrant information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-115-2-norm

116 Subsection 77(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-116-2
note: Omit 'Designated warrant information' and substitute 'Interception warrant information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-116-2-norm

117 Subsections 77(3) and (4)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-117-2
note: Substitute 'interception warrant information' for 'designated warrant information'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-117-2-norm

118 Part VIII (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-118-2
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-118-2-norm

119 Paragraph 80(1)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-119-2
note: Omit “Part VI”, substitute ‘Part 2-5’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.64
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-119-2-norm

120 Paragraph 80(1)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-120-2
note: Substitute warrant part
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-120-2-norm

121 Paragraph 81(1)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-121-2
note: Substitute warrant part
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-121-2-norm

122 Paragraph 81(1)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-122-2
note: Omit “Part VI”, substitute ‘Part 2-5’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-122-2-norm

123 Paragraph 81(1)(c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-123-2
note: Substitute warrant part
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-123-2-norm

124 Paragraphs 81(1)(f), (g) and (h)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-124-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-124-2-norm

125 Paragraphs 81(2)(a), (b) and (ba)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-125-2
note: Substitute warrant part
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-125-2-norm

126 Paragraphs 81(2)(d), (e) and (f)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-126-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-126-2-norm

127 Subsection 81(2A)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-127-2
note: Omit “Part VI warrant”, substitute ‘Part 2-5 warrant’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-127-2-norm

128 Subsection 81A(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-128-2
note: Omit “Part VI warrant”, substitute ‘Part 2-5 warrant’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-128-2-norm

129 Paragraphs 81C(3)(a) and (4)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-129-2
note: Omit “Part VI warrant”, substitute ‘Part 2-5 warrant’.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-129-2-norm

130 Subsection 84(1A) (note)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-130-2
note: Substitute 'interception warrant information' for 'designated warrant information'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-130-2-norm

131 Paragraph 92(3)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-131-2
note: Stored communications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.65
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-131-2-norm

62 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-62-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-62-2-norm

132 Part IX (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-132-2
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-132-2-norm

133 Paragraphs 94A(1)(a) and (b) and (3)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-133-2
note: Omit 'Part VI' and substitute 'Part 2-5' in section headings.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-133-2-norm

134 Subsections 100(1) and (2) and 101(1) and (2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-134-2
note: Omit 'Part VI warrants' and substitute 'Part 2-5 warrants'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-134-2-norm

135 Subparagraph 102(1)(a)(ii)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-135-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-135-2-norm

136 Paragraph 102(1)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-136-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-136-2-norm

137 Subparagraph 102(2)(a)(ii)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-137-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-137-2-norm

138 Paragraph 102(2)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-138-2
note: Omit 'lawfully obtained information', substitute 'lawfully intercepted information'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-138-2-norm

139 Paragraph 103(ab)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-139-2
note: Substitute 'Part 2-5' for 'Part VI'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.66
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-139-2-norm

140 Subsection 104(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-140-2
note: Substitute Part numbers in a provision.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.67
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-140-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-140-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 140 Subsection 104(3)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

141 Part X (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-141-2
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.67
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-141-2-norm

142 Paragraphs 107(2)(a) and (b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-142-2
note: Omit 'Part VIII', substitute 'Part 2-7'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.67
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-142-2-norm

143 Part XA (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-143-2
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.67
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-143-2-norm

144 Part XI (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-144-2
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new chapter title
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.67
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-144-2-norm

145 Section 108
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-145-2
note: Renumber as section 300.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.67
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-145-2-norm

64 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-1-sec-64-2
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.68
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-1-sec-64-2-norm

1 After subparagraph 9(1)(a)(i)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-1
note: Requires means for communication with suspected security activities
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.68
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 1 After subparagraph 9(1)(a)(i)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: requires
logic summary: Requires means for communication
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: inserts
logic summary: Inserts new clause
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

2 At the end of subsection 9(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-2
note: Restricts issuing of warrants under certain conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.68
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Prohibits issuing of warrants
premise text: Subparagraph (a)(ia)
conclusion text: subsection (3)
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

3 At the end of section 9
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-3
note: The Attorney-General must not issue a warrant in certain cases.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.68
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition of issuing warrants
premise text: The Attorney-General must not issue a warrant
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

4 Subsection 9B(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-4
note: Omit specific phrase from text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.68
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of specified phrase.
premise text: Omit ‘period must not exceed 6 months, and the’.
conclusion text: The omitted phrase should be removed.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Indicates overlap between omission and prohibited action.
premise text: Omit ‘period must not exceed 6 months, and the’.
conclusion text: The omitted phrase overlaps with a prohibited action.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Until
logic summary: Indicates temporal relationship between omission and prohibited action.
premise text: Omit ‘period must not exceed 6 months, and the’.
conclusion text: The omitted phrase is until a prohibited action.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Diffuses
logic summary: Indicates diffusion of prohibition to omission.
premise text: Omit ‘period must not exceed 6 months, and the’.
conclusion text: The omitted phrase is diffused by a prohibition.
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-4-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Recognizes
logic summary: Indicates recognition of omission as prohibited.
premise text: Omit ‘period must not exceed 6 months, and the’.
conclusion text: The omitted phrase is recognized as prohibited.
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5 After subsection 9B(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-5
note: The specified period must not exceed 3 months if subparagraph 9(1)(a)(ia) applies, or 6 months otherwise.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.68
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-5-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-5-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-5-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5 After subsection 9B(3)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-5-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MustNotExceed
logic summary: Mandatory duration restriction
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

6 At the end of paragraphs 46(1)(a), (b) and (c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-6
note: Add “and” at the end of paragraphs 46(1)(a), (b) and (c)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.69
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-6-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-6-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 6 At the end of paragraphs 46(1)(a), (b) and (c)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

7 Paragraph 46(1)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-7
note: Modify communication clause
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.69
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-7-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-7-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-7-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 7 Paragraph 46(1)(d)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-7-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Modify obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

8 At the end of subsection 46(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-8
note: Restricts issuing of warrants under certain conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.69
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-8-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-8-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-8-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Prohibits issuing of warrants
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

9 At the end of section 46
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-9
note: No warrant can be issued unless certain conditions are met.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.69
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-9-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-9-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-9-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: No warrant can be issued unless certain conditions are met.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10 Subsection 49(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-10
note: Modify time limit for certain actions
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.69
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-10-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-10-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-10-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 10 Subsection 49(3)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-10-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: modify
logic summary: Change obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

11 After paragraph 100(1)(ec)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-11
note: Insert Schedule 2 B-party interception
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.69
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-11-norm

66 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-66
note: Relevant statistics about applications of a kind referred to in subparagraph 46(1)(d)(ii) must be provided.
description: True
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.70
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-66-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-66-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-66-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 66 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-66-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Relevant statistics about applications of a kind referred to in subparagraph 46(1)(d)(ii) must be provided.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

12 After paragraph 100(2)(ec)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-12
note: Relevant statistics about applications of a kind related to warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.70
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-12-norm

13 At the end of paragraphs 101(1)(a), (b) and (c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-13
note: Add “and”.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.70
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-13-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-13-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-13-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 13 At the end of paragraphs 101(1)(a), (b) and (c)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-13-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the State.
conclusion text: The State must add “and”.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

14 After paragraph 101(1)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-14
note: Defines averages for periods related to warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.70
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-14-norm

15 At the end of paragraphs 101(2)(a), (b) and (c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-15
note: Add “and”.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.70
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-15-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-15-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 15 At the end of paragraphs 101(2)(a), (b) and (c)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

16 After paragraph 101(2)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-16
note: Calculate averages of periods related to warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.70
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-16-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-16-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 16 After paragraph 101(2)(d)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

68 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-2-sec-68
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.72
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-2-sec-68-norm

1 Subsection 5(1) (definition of equipment)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-1
note: Inserts 'and includes a telecommunications device' after 'network'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.72
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-1-norm

2 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-2
note: Defines telecommunications device
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.72
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-2-norm

3 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-3
note: Definition of telecommunications number
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.72
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-logic-alleninterval-3

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 3 Subsection 5(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligate
logic summary: Definition of telecommunications number
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: =
logic summary: Class hierarchy for telecommunications numbers
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-3-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal relation between carrier address and communication
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

4 At the end of Part IA
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-4
note: Add at the end of Part IA
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.72
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-4-norm

6Q Identification of telecommunications device
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-6q
note: A telecommunications device must be identified by a unique identifier.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.72
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6q-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6q-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6q-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 6Q Identification of telecommunications device
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6q-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must identify telecommunications device
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5 Subsection 9A(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-5
has part: 5(1) Subsection 9A(1)
has part: 5(1A) Subsection 9A(1)
has part: 5(1B) Subsection 9A(1)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.73

5(1) Subsection 9A(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-5-ss-1
part of: 5 Subsection 9A(1)
note: The Attorney-General must issue a warrant under certain conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.73
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 5(1) Subsection 9A(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: The Attorney-General has an obligation to issue a warrant.
premise text: (1) Upon receiving a request by the Director-General of Security for the issue of a warrant under this section in respect of a person, the Attorney-General may, under his or her hand, issue a warrant...
conclusion text: ...the Attorney-General is satisfied that: (a) the person is engaged in, or reasonably suspected by the Director-General of Security of being engaged in, or of being likely to engage in, activities prejudicial to security; and...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5(1A) Subsection 9A(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a
part of: 5 Subsection 9A(1)
note: Authorises interception of communications under specified conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.73
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-ltl-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-diffusion-5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-cogai-6

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 5(1A) Subsection 9A(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Authorises interception of communications.
premise text: The warrant authorises persons approved under section 12 in respect of the warrant to intercept...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classify
logic summary: Classifies communications as subject to interception.
premise text: (1A) The warrant authorises persons approved under section 12 in respect of the warrant to intercept...
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Intercepts communications during specified time period.
premise text: (1A) The warrant authorises persons approved under section 12 in respect of the warrant to intercept...
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Repeats
logic summary: Intercepts communications repeatedly during specified time period.
premise text: (1A) The warrant authorises persons approved under section 12 in respect of the warrant to intercept...
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-diffusion-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Spreads
logic summary: Intercepts communications through specified device.
premise text: (1A) The warrant authorises persons approved under section 12 in respect of the warrant to intercept...
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1a-logic-cogai-6
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Recognise
logic summary: Recognises communications as subject to interception.
premise text: (1A) The warrant authorises persons approved under section 12 in respect of the warrant to intercept...
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5(1B) Subsection 9A(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-5-ss-1b
part of: 5 Subsection 9A(1)
note: Authorises entry on premises for equipment installation, maintenance, use or recovery.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.73
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1b-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1b-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1b-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 5(1B) Subsection 9A(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-5-ss-1b-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Grants permission
premise text: (1B) The warrant may authorise entry...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

70 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-70
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-70-norm

6 Saving provision
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-6
note: Saving provision for warrants issued under subsection 9A(1) of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6-logic-alleninterval-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to preserve the validity of warrants.
premise text: The repeal and substitution...
conclusion text: Does not affect the validity...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-6-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Temporal overlap between warrant issuance and Schedule commencement.
premise text: Before the commencement...
conclusion text: Warrant issued before commencement.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

7 After paragraph 9A(2)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-7
note: Warrant must include details to identify telecommunications device
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-7-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-7-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-7-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-7-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 7 After paragraph 9A(2)(b)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-7-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-7-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: IDENTITY
logic summary: Identify telecommunications device
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

8 At the end of section 9A
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-8
note: The Attorney-General must not issue a warrant for interception of communications without satisfying certain conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-8-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-8-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-8-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-8-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 8 At the end of section 9A
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-8-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition
premise text: The Attorney-General must not issue a warrant.
conclusion text: unless satisfied with certain conditions.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-8-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classify
logic summary: Classification of warrants
premise text: Warrant issuance is subject to conditions.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

9 Subsection 11B(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-9
has part: 9(1) Subsection 11B(1)
has part: 9(1A) Subsection 11B(1)
has part: 9(1B) Subsection 11B(1)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74

9(1) Subsection 11B(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-9-ss-1
part of: 9 Subsection 11B(1)
note: The Attorney-General may issue a warrant for the interception of communications.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-ltl-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-deontic-5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-deontic-6

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 9(1) Subsection 11B(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: May
logic summary: Permission granted by the Attorney-General.
premise text: The Attorney-General may issue a warrant.
conclusion text: A warrant can be issued for the interception of communications.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classifies
logic summary: Communications intercepted under this section are related to foreign intelligence.
premise text: The warrant is issued for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence.
conclusion text: Foreign intelligence is a matter specified in the notice.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Within
logic summary: The warrant is issued within a specific timeframe.
premise text: The Attorney-General is satisfied that the interception is necessary within a certain timeframe.
conclusion text: The warrant must be issued before the specified timeframe expires.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-ltl-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Recurring
logic summary: The warrant can be renewed for recurring interceptions.
premise text: The Attorney-General may issue a warrant under this section authorising persons approved under section 12.
conclusion text: The warrant can be renewed for recurring interceptions.
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-deontic-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: The Attorney-General has an obligation to issue a warrant if requested by the Director-General of Security.
premise text: The Director-General of Security gives a notice in writing to the Attorney-General requesting the Attorney-General to issue a warrant.
conclusion text: The Attorney-General must issue a warrant if requested by the Director-General of Security.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1-logic-deontic-6
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permission
logic summary: The Attorney-General has permission to issue a warrant for the interception of communications.
premise text: The Attorney-General may, under his or her hand, issue a warrant in respect of a person.
conclusion text: The Attorney-General has permission to issue a warrant for the interception of communications.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

9(1A) Subsection 11B(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-9-ss-1a
part of: 9 Subsection 11B(1)
note: Authorises interception of communications under specified conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1a-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1a-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1a-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1a-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Authorises interception of communications.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1a-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classify
logic summary: Classifies communications to be intercepted.
premise text: (a) communications that are being made to or from any telecommunications service...
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

9(1B) Subsection 11B(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-9-ss-1b
part of: 9 Subsection 11B(1)
note: Authorises entry on premises for equipment installation, maintenance, use or recovery.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.74
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1b-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1b-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1b-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 9(1B) Subsection 11B(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-9-ss-1b-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permit
logic summary: Grants permission
premise text: (1B) The warrant may authorise entry...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10 Saving provision
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-10
note: Saving provision for equipment-based interception
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.75
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-10-norm

72 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-72
note: Validity of warrants issued under subsection 11B(1) of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.76
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-72-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-72-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-72-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to uphold warrant validity
premise text: Warrant issued under subsection 11B(1)
conclusion text: Validity of warrant unaffected
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

11 After paragraph 11B(2)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-11
note: Details sufficient to identify telecommunications device must be included in warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.76
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-11-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-11-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-11-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-11-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 11 After paragraph 11B(2)(b)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-11-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to include details
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-11-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: IDENTITY
logic summary: Class hierarchy for warrant requirements
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

12 At the end of section 11B (before the note)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-12
note: The Attorney-General must not issue a warrant for interception of communications unless certain conditions are met.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.76
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-alleninterval-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-5
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-6

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 12 At the end of section 11B (before the note)
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: Prohibition of warrant issuance without justification
premise text: The Attorney-General must issue a warrant.
conclusion text: The Attorney-General must not issue a warrant.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: ClassInclusion
logic summary: Justification for warrant issuance requires identification of telecommunications services used or likely to be used
premise text: There are no other practicable methods available to the Organisation at the time of making the application.
conclusion text: The Organisation must identify the telecommunications services used or likely to be used.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Justification for warrant issuance requires consideration of practicable methods at the time of application
premise text: Interception of communications made to or from a telecommunications service used, or likely to be used, by that person or foreign organisation would not otherwise be practicable.
conclusion text: The Organisation must consider the practicability of interception at the time of application.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Permission
logic summary: Justification for warrant issuance requires consideration of foreign organisation's telecommunications services used or likely to be used
premise text: Interception of communications made to or from a telecommunications service used, or likely to be used, by that person or foreign organisation would not otherwise be practicable.
conclusion text: The Organisation must consider the foreign organisation's telecommunications services used or likely to be used.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Justification for warrant issuance requires consideration of Organisation's resources at the time of application
premise text: There are no other practicable methods available to the Organisation at the time of making the application.
conclusion text: The Organisation must consider its resources at the time of application.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-12-logic-deontic-6
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Right
logic summary: Justification for warrant issuance requires consideration of person or foreign organisation's telecommunications services used or likely to be used
premise text: Interception of communications made to or from a telecommunications service used, or likely to be used, by that person or foreign organisation would not otherwise be practicable.
conclusion text: The Organisation must consider the person or foreign organisation's telecommunications services used or likely to be used.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

13 After paragraph 16(1)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-13
note: Exclusion of interception of communications made by means of a telecommunications device identified in the warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.76
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-13-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-13-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-13-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-13-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Exclude
logic summary: Exclusion of interception
premise text: Warrant does not authorise interception
conclusion text: Prohibition on interception
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-13-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Identify
logic summary: Identification of telecommunications device
premise text: Telecommunications device identified in the warrant
conclusion text: Exclusion of interception
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

14 After subsection 16(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-14
note: Certifying person must provide description of device to Managing Director of carrier.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.76
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-14-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-14-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-14-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-14-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 14 After subsection 16(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-14-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation to provide description
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-14-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: ClassInclusion
logic summary: Device identification class inclusion
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

15 Paragraph 16(2)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-15
note: Insertion of phrase after 'from which'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.77
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-15-norm

16 Paragraph 16(2)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-16
note: Insertion of phrase after 'that service'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.77
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-16-norm

17 After paragraph 42(4A)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-17
note: Details of telecommunications device must be provided
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.77
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-17-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-17-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-17-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-17-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 17 After paragraph 42(4A)(b)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-17-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to provide details
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-17-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: IDENTITY
logic summary: Details of telecommunications device are sufficient for identification
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

18 Paragraph 46A(1)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-18
note: Repeal paragraph and substitute with prohibition on intercepting communications.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.77
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-18-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-18-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-18-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-18-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits interception of communications.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-18-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Substitute
logic summary: Substitutes new provision for repealed paragraph.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

74 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-74
note: Assistance in connection with investigation of class 2 offence
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.78
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-74-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-74-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-74-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 74 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-74-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MAY
logic summary: Obligation to assist in investigation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

19 At the end of subsection 46A(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-19
note: Restricts issuing of a warrant authorising interception of communications.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.78
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-19-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-19-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-19-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-19-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits issuing a warrant for interception.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-19-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Restrict
logic summary: Restricts issuance of a warrant.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

20 Paragraph 46A(2)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-20
note: Specify the scope of interception under a warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.78
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-20-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-20-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 20 Paragraph 46A(2)(a)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

21 At the end of section 46A
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-21
note: Must not issue warrant for interception of communications without certain conditions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.78
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-21-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-21-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-21-logic-descriptionlogic-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-21-logic-alleninterval-3

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-21-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: must not
logic summary: Prohibition
premise text: there are no other practicable methods available to the agency at the time of making the application
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-21-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: has condition
logic summary: Conditions for warrant issuance
premise text: interception of communications made by means of a telecommunications device identified in the warrant unless he or she is satisfied that...
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-21-logic-alleninterval-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal conditions for warrant issuance
premise text: there are no other practicable methods available to the agency at the time of making the application
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

22 After paragraph 60(4)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-22
note: Prohibition on warrant-based interception of communications made by means of a telecommunications device identified in the warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.78
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-22-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-22-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-22-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-22-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-22-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: Classify
logic summary: Classification of warrant-based interception
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

23 After subsection 60(4)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-23
note: Certifying person must provide description of device to Managing Director of carrier.
description: true
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.79
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-23-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-23-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-23-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-23-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 23 After subsection 60(4)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-23-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Mandatory action
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-23-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: ClassInclusion
logic summary: Device description class
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

24 Paragraph 60(5)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-24
note: Insertion of a particular device or means after 'particular service'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.79
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-24-norm

76 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-3-sec-76
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-3-sec-76-norm

1 Subsection 5(1) (definition of class 1 offence)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-1
note: Repeal the definition of class 1 offence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-1-norm

2 Subsection 5(1) (definition of class 2 offence)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-2
note: Repeal the definition of class 2 offence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-2-norm

3 Subsection 5(1) (definition of named person warrant)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-3
note: Omit ‘, 45A’
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of ‘, 45A’
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

4 Subsection 5(1) (paragraph (a) of the definition of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-4
note: Repeal and substitute a paragraph with a new definition of a serious offence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits the specified paragraph.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5 Subsection 5(1) (definition of serious offence)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-5
note: Repeal definition, substitute with new meaning.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-5-norm

6 Subsection 5(1) (definition of telecommunications service
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-6
note: Omit '45,'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-6-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-6-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-6-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omitting '45,',
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

7 Subsection 5D(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-7
note: Defines serious offences
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.80
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-alleninterval-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-ltl-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-deontic-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-deontic-4

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 7 Subsection 5D(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: >
logic summary: Temporal interval
premise text: An offence is a serious offence if it is...
conclusion text: Division 72, 101, 102 or 103 of the Criminal Code
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-ltl-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: >
logic summary: Recurring trace
premise text: An offence in relation to which the ACC is conducting a special investigation.
conclusion text: except for the purposes of an application for a warrant by an agency other than the ACC
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-deontic-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: =
logic summary: Duty
premise text: An offence is a serious offence if it is...
conclusion text: an offence against Division 72, 101, 102 or 103 of the Criminal Code
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-7-logic-deontic-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: =
logic summary: Duty
premise text: An offence in relation to which the ACC is conducting a special investigation.
conclusion text: an agency other than the ACC
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

8 Subsection 5D(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-8
note: Omit 'is a class 2 offence', substitute 'is also a serious offence'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.81
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-8-norm

9 Subsections 5D(2A), (3), (3A), (4), (5) and (5A)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-9
note: Omit 'class 2 offence', substitute 'serious offence'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.81
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-9-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-9-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-9-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits the use of 'class 2 offence'
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10 Subsection 5D(5A)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-10
note: Omit 'Division 307 or'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.81
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-10-norm

11 Subsection 5D(6)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-11
note: Omit 'class 2 offence', substitute 'serious offence'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.81
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-11-norm

12 Subsection 5D(6)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-12
note: Omit 'class 2 offence', substitute 'serious offence'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.81
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-12-norm

13 At the end of section 5D
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-13
note: An offence is also a serious offence if it is an offence constituted by receiving or assisting a person who is, to the offender’s knowledge, guilty of a serious offence mentioned in subsection (1),
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.81
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 13 At the end of section 5D
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: if
logic summary: Conditional obligation
premise text: offence is an offence constituted by receiving or assisting a person who is, to the offender’s knowledge, guilty of a serious offence mentioned in subsection (1)
conclusion text: serious offence
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal relation between offences
premise text: offence is an offence constituted by receiving or assisting a person who is, to the offender’s knowledge, guilty of a serious offence mentioned in subsection (1)
conclusion text: serious offence
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal relation between offences
premise text: offence is an offence constituted by receiving or assisting a person who is, to the offender’s knowledge, guilty of a serious offence mentioned in subsection (1)
conclusion text: serious offence
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: if
logic summary: Diffusion of obligations
premise text: offence is an offence constituted by receiving or assisting a person who is, to the offender’s knowledge, guilty of a serious offence mentioned in subsection (1)
conclusion text: serious offence
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-13-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: if
logic summary: Cognitive AI application
premise text: offence is an offence constituted by receiving or assisting a person who is, to the offender’s knowledge, guilty of a serious offence mentioned in subsection (1)
conclusion text: serious offence
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

78 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-78
note: Enable person to escape punishment or dispose of proceeds.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-78-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-78-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 78 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

14 Paragraph 6H(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-14
note: Repeal paragraph 6H(a)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-14-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-14-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-14-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits warrant under section 48
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

15 Paragraph 6H(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-15
note: Omit specified provisions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-15-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-15-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-15-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of specified provisions.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

16 Subsection 7(9)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-16
note: Repeal of subsection and substitution with new provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-16-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-16-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-16-logic-alleninterval-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-16-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 16 Subsection 7(9)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-16-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition of serious offence
premise text: Subsection (9)
conclusion text: Repeal and substitution
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-16-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Temporal relation
logic summary: Temporal relation between serious offence and investigation
premise text: Subsection (6)
conclusion text: Investigation purposes
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

17 Sections 45 and 45A
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-17
note: Repeal sections
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-17-norm

18 Paragraphs 46(1)(d) and 46A(1)(d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-18
note: Omit specific wording from headings.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-18-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-18-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-18-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits specific action.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

19 Section 47
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-19
note: Omit '45, 45A',.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-19-norm

20 Subsection 48(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-20
note: Omit '45 or' from text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-20-norm

21 Paragraph 48(3)(c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-21
note: Omit “45 or” from Schedule 4, Class 1 and class 2 offences.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.82
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-21-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-21-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-21-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of “45 or”.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

22 Subparagraph 48(3)(d)(ii)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-22
note: Omit “45 or”.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-22-norm

23 Paragraph 49(7)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-23
note: Repeal paragraph 46(1)(d)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-23-norm

24 Paragraph 49(7)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-24
note: Omit specified provisions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-24-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-24-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-24-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of specified provisions.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

25 Subsection 54(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-25
note: Omit specified section numbers.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-25-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-25-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-25-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of section numbers.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

26 Subsection 61(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-26
note: Omit '45, 45A',.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-26-norm

27 Subparagraph 81A(2)(g)(i)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-27
note: Repeal of subparagraph 81A(2)(g)(i)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-27-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-27-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-27-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition of subparagraph 81A(2)(g)(i)
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

28 Subparagraph 81A(2)(g)(ii)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-28
note: Omit specified provisions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-28-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-28-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-28-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of specified provisions.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

29 Subparagraph 81C(2)(g)(i)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-29
note: Repeal subparagraph 81C(2)(g)(i)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-29-norm

30 Subparagraph 81C(2)(g)(ii)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-30
note: Omit specified sections.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.83
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-30-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-30-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-30-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of specified sections.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

80 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-80
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.84
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-80-norm

31 Pending applications
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-31
note: Application of amended Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 to pending warrant applications
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.84
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-31-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-31-logic-alleninterval-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-31-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: during
logic summary: Temporal interval application
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

32 Continuation of warrants under sections 45 and 45A
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-32
note: Continuation of warrants under sections 45 and 45A
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.84
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-32-norm

33 Warrants under sections 46, 46A and 48 unaffected
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-33
note: Warrants under sections 46, 46A and 48 unaffected
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.84
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-33-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-33-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-33-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 33 Warrants under sections 46, 46A and 48 unaffected
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-33-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Obligation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

34 Renewals of warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-34
note: Renewal of warrants issued after commencement under section 46 or 46A
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.85
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 34 Renewals of warrants
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Renewal
logic summary: Renewal of warrants
premise text: Section 46 or 46A
conclusion text: Renewal of warrant issued before commencement under section 45 or 45A
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Temporal relation
logic summary: Temporal relation between warrants
premise text: Commencement under section 46 or 46A
conclusion text: Renewal of warrant issued before commencement under section 45 or 45A
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Recurring trace
logic summary: Recurring trace of warrant renewals
premise text: Section 46 or 46A
conclusion text: Renewal of warrant issued before commencement under section 45 or 45A
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Diffusion
logic summary: Diffusion of warrant renewals
premise text: Section 46 or 46A
conclusion text: Renewal of warrant issued before commencement under section 45 or 45A
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-34-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Classification
logic summary: Classification of warrants using CogAI
premise text: Section 45 or 45A
conclusion text: Renewal of warrant issued before commencement under section 46 or 46A
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

82 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-4-sec-82
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-4-sec-82-norm

1 Subsection 5(1) (subparagraph (a)(v) of the definition of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-1
note: Omit certain references to the Chief Executive Officer of the ACC.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-1-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-1-norm
type: Permission
modality: Deontic
part of: 1 Subsection 5(1) (subparagraph (a)(v) of the definition of
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

2 Division 1 of Part 2-5
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-2
note: Repeal Division
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-2-norm

3 Paragraph 35(1)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-3
note: Omit subsections and impose on chief officer of a Commonwealth agency
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-3-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 3 Paragraph 35(1)(a)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

4 Section 47
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-4
note: Repeal section and substitute with new provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-4-norm

47 Limit on authority conferred by warrant
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-47
note: Limit on authority conferred by warrant
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-47-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-47-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-47-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 47 Limit on authority conferred by warrant
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-47-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: forbid
logic summary: Prohibits interception of communications without carrier notification
premise text: Notification required for warrant issuance
conclusion text: Interception prohibited
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5 Subsection 52(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-5
note: Omit 'other than the Australian Federal Police'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-5-norm

6 Paragraphs 52(2)(a) and (b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-6
note: Replace 'Commissioner of Police' with 'Secretary of the Department'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.86
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-6-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-6-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-6-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 6 Paragraphs 52(2)(a) and (b)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-6-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Omit
logic summary: Omission
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

7 Subsection 53(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-7
note: Omit 'other than the Australian Federal Police'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-7-norm

8 Paragraphs 53(1)(a), (b) and (d)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-8
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-8-norm

9 Section 54
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-9
note: Repeal section and substitute with new provision
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-9-norm

54 Entry into force of warrants
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-54
note: Entry into force of warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-54-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-54-logic-alleninterval-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-54-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Applicable
logic summary: Requires temporal relation
premise text: Defines entry into force of warrants
conclusion text: Temporal relation required
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10 Section 56
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-10
note: Repeal section
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-10-norm

11 Subsections 57(1) and (2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-11
has part: 11(1) Subsections 57(1) and (2)
has part: 11(2) Subsections 57(1) and (2)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87

11(1) Subsections 57(1) and (2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-11-ss-1
part of: 11 Subsections 57(1) and (2)
note: Notify other agencies of warrant revocation proposal.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-11-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-11-ss-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-11-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Agency must notify other agencies.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

11(2) Subsections 57(1) and (2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-11-ss-2
part of: 11 Subsections 57(1) and (2)
note: Revocation of warrant by chief officer
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.87
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-11-ss-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-11-ss-2-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-11-ss-2-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 11(2) Subsections 57(1) and (2)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-11-ss-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Chief officer can revoke warrant
premise text: (2) The chief officer of an agency may at any time...
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

84 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-84
note: Revoke warrant forthwith.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-84-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-84-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-84-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibition of revocation
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

12 Paragraphs 57(3)(a) and (b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-12
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-12-norm

13 At the end of section 57
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-13
note: Section does not apply in relation to a warrant that has ceased to be in force.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-13-norm

14 Subsection 58(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-14
note: Ensure discontinuation of communications interceptions upon warrant revocation or proposed revocation.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-14-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-14-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-14-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Obligation to ensure discontinuation of communications interceptions.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

15 Subsection 58(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-15
note: Omit specified text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-15-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-15-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-15-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of text.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

16 Section 59
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-16
note: Substitute 'Secretary of the Department' for 'Commissioner of Police'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-16-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-16-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 16 Section 59
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

17 Paragraph 60(2)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-17
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-17-norm

18 Subsection 61(3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-18
note: Repeal subsection
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-18-norm

19 Saving provision
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-19
note: Preserves effect of certificate issued under subsection 61(3) of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.88
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-19-norm

20 Subsection 61(5)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-20
note: Omit “(3) or”.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.89
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-20-norm

21 Subsection 79(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-21
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.89
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-21-norm

22 Part 2-7 (heading)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-22
note: Repeal heading and substitute with new text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.89
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-22-norm

23 Sections 80 and 81
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-23
note: Repeal sections and substitute with new provisions.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.89
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-23-norm

80 Commonwealth agencies to keep documents connected with issue
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-80
note: Keep documents connected with issue of warrants
description: Yes
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.89
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-80-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-80-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-80-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 80 Commonwealth agencies to keep documents connected with issue
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-80-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Must keep documents
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

86 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-86
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.90
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-86-norm

81 Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-81
has part: 81(1) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
has part: 81(2) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
has part: 81(3) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.90

81(1) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-81-ss-1
part of: 81 Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
note: Agency must keep records of telephone applications, warrant issuances, and interceptions.
description: Particulars of each telephone application, warrant issuance, and interception.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.90
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-1-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 81(1) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Agency must keep records.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-1-logic-descriptionlogic-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: DescriptionLogic
operator: IS-A
logic summary: Records are particulars of telephone applications, warrant issuances, and interceptions.
execution surface: modalities::dl
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

81(2) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-81-ss-2
part of: 81 Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
note: Particulars of interception service must be indicated for named person warrant.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.90
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-2-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-2-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 81(2) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

81(3) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-81-ss-3
part of: 81 Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
note: Agency must keep records made under this section.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.90
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-3-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-3-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-3-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 81(3) Other records to be kept by Commonwealth agencies in
borne by: Agent
scope note: borne by: Agent
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-81-ss-3-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: MUST
logic summary: Duty to keep records
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

24 Subsections 81A(1) and (2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-24
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.91
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-24-norm

25 Saving provision
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-25
note: Saving provision for General Register of Warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.91
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-25-norm

26 Subsection 81B(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-26
note: Deliver General Register to Minister for inspection within 3 months after commencement of Schedule 5.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.91
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-26-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-26-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-26-logic-alleninterval-2

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-26-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 26 Subsection 81B(1)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-26-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes a duty on the Secretary of the Department.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-26-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Overlaps
logic summary: Specifies a temporal interval for delivery of the General Register.
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

27 Subsection 81B(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-27
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.91
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-27-norm

88 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-88
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-88-norm

28 Subsections 81C(1) and (2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-28
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-28-norm

29 Saving provision
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-29
note: Saving provision for Special Register of Warrants
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-29-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-29-logic-alleninterval-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-29-logic-alleninterval-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Applicable
logic summary: Temporal relation application
premise text: before the commencement of this item
conclusion text: after that commencement
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

30 Subsection 81D(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-30
note: Deliver Special Register to Minister within 3 months after Schedule 5 commencement.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-30-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-30-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-30-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes duty on Secretary of Department
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

31 Subsections 81D(2) and (3)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-31
note: Omit 'Commissioner of Police', substitute 'Secretary of the Department'.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-31-norm

32 Subsection 81E(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-32
note: Substitute 'Secretary of the Department' for 'Commissioner of Police'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-32-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-32-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-32-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 32 Subsection 81E(2)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-32-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes an obligation on the State
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

33 Subsection 81E(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-33
note: Substitute 'Secretary' for 'Commissioner of Police'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-33-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-33-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-33-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 33 Subsection 81E(2)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-33-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes an obligation on the State
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

34 Saving provision
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-34
note: Notice given under section 81E of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 has effect after commencement as if it were a notice by the Secretary.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.92
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-34-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-34-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-34-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 34 Saving provision
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-34-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Imposes an obligation on the state.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

35 Section 82
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-35
note: Repeal section
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.93
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-35-norm

36 At the end of paragraph 86(1)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-36
note: Add “and” at the end of paragraph 86(1)(a)
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.93
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-36-norm

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-36-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 36 At the end of paragraph 86(1)(a)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

37 After paragraph 86(1)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-37
note: Entitlement to access registers
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.93
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-37-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-37-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-37-norm
type: Right
modality: Deontic
part of: 37 After paragraph 86(1)(b)
held by: State
scope note: held by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-37-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: hasRight
logic summary: Has the right to access
premise text: Agent has entitlement
conclusion text: State must provide access
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

38 Paragraph 86(1)(c)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-38
note: Insert 'or the General Register or Special Register' after 'agency'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.93
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-38-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-38-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-38-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 38 Paragraph 86(1)(c)
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-38-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Obligation
logic summary: Mandatory insertion
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

39 At the end of section 86
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-39
note: The Ombudsman's powers include doing anything incidental or conducive to the performance of any of the Ombudsman’s functions under this Part.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.93
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-39-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-39-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-39-norm
type: Obligation
modality: Deontic
part of: 39 At the end of section 86
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-39-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: includes
logic summary: The provision includes the Ombudsman's powers.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

90 Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006
type: Concept
realized by: sch-5-sec-90
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-5-sec-90-norm

1 Subsection 5(1) (subparagraph (f)(ii) of the definition of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-1
note: Repeal and substitute a subparagraph with an investigation into serious misconduct.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-1-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-1-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-1-norm
type: Prohibition
modality: Deontic
part of: 1 Subsection 5(1) (subparagraph (f)(ii) of the definition of
borne by: State
scope note: borne by: State
deontic status: HeuristicDerived
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-1-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibition
logic summary: Prohibits the repeal of a subparagraph.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

2 Subsection 5(1) (at the end of paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-2
note: Add “or” at the end of paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of the definition of prescribed offence.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-deontic-1
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-alleninterval-2
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-ltl-3
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-diffusion-4
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-cogai-5

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Add
logic summary: Adding to a set
premise text: The definition of prescribed offence includes (a), (b) and (c)
conclusion text: (a), (b) and (c) or
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-alleninterval-2
type: LogicApplication
modality: AllenInterval
operator: Add
logic summary: Adding temporal intervals
premise text: The definition of prescribed offence has a start time
conclusion text: (a), (b) and (c) at the end
execution surface: modalities::interval_reasoning
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-ltl-3
type: LogicApplication
modality: LTL
operator: Add
logic summary: Adding to an ordered trace
premise text: The definition of prescribed offence has a sequence of paragraphs
conclusion text: (a), (b) and (c) in the sequence
execution surface: modalities::temporal_ltl
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-diffusion-4
type: LogicApplication
modality: Diffusion
operator: Add
logic summary: Adding to a diffusion process
premise text: The definition of prescribed offence is being updated
conclusion text: (a), (b) and (c) are added
execution surface: modalities::diffusion
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-2-logic-cogai-5
type: LogicApplication
modality: CogAI
operator: Add
logic summary: Adding to a cognitive agent's knowledge
premise text: The definition of prescribed offence is being processed by the agent
conclusion text: (a), (b) and (c) are added
execution surface: sparql_library::parsers::chk_parser
confidence: 0.5000
curation status: Proposed

3 Subsection 5(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-3
note: Definition of Whistleblowers Protection Act
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-3-norm

4 Paragraph 5D(4)(b)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-4
note: Repeal paragraph and substitute Division 1A of Part IV of the Crimes Act 1900.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-4-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-4-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-4-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Imposes prohibition.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

5 Subsection 6(2)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-5
note: Repeal subsection
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-5-norm

6 Subsection 7(11)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-6
note: Repeal subsection
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-6-norm

7 Subsection 12(1)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-7
note: Omit “(1)” from the text.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-7-norm

8 Subsection 55(5)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-8
note: Insert 'or an employee of a carrier' after 'designated officer'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.94
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-8-norm

9 Section 78
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-9
note: Omit “in Part IIA or”.
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.95
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-9-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-9-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-9-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: Prohibit
logic summary: Prohibits omission of phrase
premise text: Omit ‘in Part IIA or’.
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed

10 Paragraphs 81C(3)(a) and (4)(a)
type: Concept
realized by: sch-6-sec-10
note: Insertion of 'has been issued' after 'warrant'
curation status: Proposed
schema version: 2
proposed by: legis2cml
source: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006.pdf, p.95
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-10-norm
asserts: telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-10-logic-deontic-1

telecommunications-interception-amendment-act-2006-sch-6-sec-10-logic-deontic-1
type: LogicApplication
modality: Deontic
operator: insertion
logic summary: Insertion of a word into text
execution surface: modalities::logic::deontic
confidence: 1.0000
curation status: Proposed