It’s also possible that there was some confusion in the printing of these forms (they may well have been printed in Mother England).”
Yes, as I've said before there are just too many possibilities to come to any safe conclusion. One has to get a another certificate to compare with.
"On one occasion at a church ceremony I omitted to take the fee of 7s.6d. Luckily I discovered the home of one of the parties was being used for the reception. It was a large house with a crescent shaped drive. On arriving I quickly discovered I was the only cyclist. I boldly knocked on the door. The fee was found, regrets were expressed, and everything was complete. " Later on the same page, we find this more encouraging note that had the same sum in legislation dating back to the 1830's for registration of births in certain circumstances:
"The new Act provides for this by appointing District Registrars who are "authorised and required to inform themselves carefully of every Birth and of every Death which should happen within their respective Districts, after the last day of June, an d without claiming fee or reward from the persons requiring the Registration, if the information of Birth is given within 42 days, and of death within 5 days after the event, to register same, according to the prescribed form, under a penalty of £50. But those parents who shall neglect to have the Births of their children registered within 42 days will subject themselves to much additional trouble, and to fees of 7s.6d."
In summary, would it have been so odd if similar fees were applied around the British Empire and Commonwealth? Likewise, would it have been so odd for former colonies, as newly formed republics to simply retain the basic form that had been in use for decades?
I'm not convinced that the Shilling/Pence/Cents issue is a disqualifier, just because of the change of the monetary denominations went from Pence to Cents. Old bureaucratic habits die hard.