Skip to content
Coverage

Unwanted calls

Australia Spam Act 2003 and Do Not Call Register Act 2006

NationalAUDerived or secondary source

Australia

Rule id
calls.au-spam-dncr
Version
1.0.0
In force from
May 31, 2007
Last read against its sources
August 5, 2026
Countries bound
Australia

In plain language

What this regime says.

Register on the Do Not Call Register, complain to the ACMA, and understand that penalties go to the Commonwealth rather than to you.

Who is covered

People receiving unsolicited marketing calls, texts or faxes on a number in Australia.

What you get

No money. A preference registration that reduces the calls, and a regulator complaint that can lead to a penalty paid to the state.

Where claims go wrong

  • Expecting a per-call payment. That is a United States feature and it does not exist here.
The official claim route

Authority

Every citation,
with its pinpoint.

A claim that cites “EU law” gets filed. A claim that cites Article 7(1)(c) gets answered. These are the exact coordinates this entry rests on.
  1. Do Not Call Register Act 2006 (Cth) and Spam Act 2003 (Cth)Commonwealth of Australia consolidated ActsURL verified 2026-08-05Do Not Call Register Act 2006 ss. 11–12; Spam Act 2003 ss. 16–18

Sources

Where a figure is indexed, converted or published by a regulator rather than fixed in the instrument, the provenance is recorded separately. Anything marked as a modelled estimate is exactly that — a model, not a statutory number.

What it imposes

Clocks, defences and the ladder.

A rule module builds these while it evaluates, because a limitation period depends on which forum is open to you. What follows is the structure this regime produces — deliberately with no dates and no figures, because those belong to your facts rather than to the law.

What it entitles you to, beyond money

  • An enforceable requirement that they stopEvery regime here requires a caller to stop on request, and to identify itself. Send a written objection to any caller you can name, keep the date, and report continued contact — repeat contact after an objection is the breach regulators move on.Do Not Call Register Act 2006 ss. 11–12; Spam Act 2003 ss. 16–18

What the other side will say

Each of these is a refusal this regime lets a counterparty attempt, paired with the answer to it. Reading them before you write is worth more than any amount of polish on the letter itself.

"It was not us, it was a lead generator"

high likelihood

We did not place that call. It was made by an independent marketing partner and we are not responsible for their conduct.

What answers it

The TCPA reaches calls made "on behalf of" a seller, and the FCC has long held that a seller can be vicariously liable on ordinary federal agency principles — actual authority, apparent authority, or ratification. Ask, in writing, for the identity of the lead generator, the contract governing the campaign, and the record of the consent they say they obtained for your number. A seller that took the sale but disclaims the call has to explain how it accepted the benefit without ratifying the conduct.

"You gave consent on a website"

high likelihood

Our records show you consented to receive marketing calls when you filled in a form on [some website].

What answers it

Then ask for the record. Prior express written consent has to be a signed agreement, identifying the seller, disclosing that signing authorises automated or prerecorded marketing calls to a designated number, and disclosing that signing is not a condition of purchase. Demand the actual capture: the URL, the timestamp, the IP address, the exact disclosure text shown, and the number entered. Very often the record is a purchased lead with none of this, or a number that is not yours.

"We were trying to reach someone else"

medium likelihood

This number was previously held by our customer. We had consent; we simply did not know it had been reassigned.

What answers it

Good faith about a reassigned number is not a defence once you have told them. Every call after your first "stop" or "wrong number" is knowingly made to a non-consenting party, and is the strongest part of your claim. Record the date you first told them.

"We have an established business relationship with you"

medium likelihood

You are an existing customer, so the do-not-call rules do not apply to us.

What answers it

The established-business-relationship exemption to the national registry is time-limited and defeasible: it runs 18 months from your last transaction, or three months from an inquiry, and it evaporates the moment you ask them to stop. It has never been a defence to the separate prohibition on prerecorded marketing calls without prior express written consent.

Where to take it next

  1. Written objection to the callerAsk them to stop, in writing, and to confirm they have removed your number. Ask on what basis they believe they had your consent, and for a copy of it. Keep everything.Claim directtypically 28 days
  2. Complain to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)The ACMA actively enforces both Acts and has issued multi-million-dollar penalties in recent years, particularly for marketing messages without a functional unsubscribe facility. Individual complaints are the raw material for those cases. Complain through the ACMA site or the Do Not Call Register complaint form.Regulatortypically 90 daysofficial page

Documents

What this regime can produce.

Every one of these is a document you send yourself, in your own name. Duesday never writes to anybody on your behalf and is never anyone’s agent.

The same claim type elsewhere

Other rights in the same countries

Australia — Australia Post compensation and Express Post guaranteeAUNationalAustraliaAustralian Postal Corporation Act 1989 and Australia Post’s Terms and ConditionsConfidence: lowAustralia — Australian Consumer Law consumer guaranteesAUNationalAustraliaAustralian Consumer Law, s 60 (guarantee as to due care and skill)Confidence: highAustralia — Australian Consumer Law unfair contract terms and misleading conductAUNationalAustraliaAustralian Consumer Law, ss.23-28 (unfair contract terms)Confidence: mediumAustralia — ePayments Code and Australian Consumer LawAUNationalAustraliaePayments Code (ASIC), Chapter CConfidence: mediumAustralia — Medicare, bulk billing, the MBS and informed financial consentAUNationalAustraliaHealth Insurance Act 1973 (Cth), s. 20AConfidence: mediumAustralia — Part IVA representative proceedingsAUNationalAustraliaFederal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), Part IVAConfidence: mediumAustralia — single price rule, ACL s.48AUNationalAustraliaAustralian Consumer Law, s.48 (Competition and Consumer Act 2010, Sch. 2)Confidence: mediumAustralia — State operator passenger charters (NSW TrainLink, V/Line, Queensland Rail) and the Australian Consumer LawAUNationalAustraliaAustralian Consumer Law (Competition and Consumer Act 2010, Schedule 2) and the state operators' customer chartersConfidence: low

Does this one reach your facts?

The engine runs every regime that could apply at once and reconciles them, rather than making you guess which page to read.

Not a law firm. Not legal advice. You send it yourself. This page describes a law; it is not advice about your situation and no outcome is promised.