The Act gives the Commissioner of Police sole authority to seek Local Court orders restricting the behaviour of “registrable persons” to reduce risks to children, including emergency interim orders and time-limited contact or workplace bans. The Court decides on balance of probabilities whether an order will reduce risk; breaches attract criminal penalties and arrest powers.
Government agencies must provide information for risk assessment, proceedings are usually private, and orders can be made or varied by consent or after leave is granted.
The Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 (NSW) establishes a civil regulatory regime that sits alongside the criminal law and the child sex offender registration scheme. Its central operative provision is s 5(1), which empowers the Local Court to grant a child protection prohibition order against a registrable person if two cumulative preconditions are met on the balance of probabilities: first, that there is reasonable cause to believe the person poses a risk to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children or children generally (defined in s 3(2) by reference to the risk of conduct that may constitute a registrable offence), and second, that the order will reduce that risk.
The Act does not require the court to identify a particular child or class of children at risk (s 5(4) and s 7(3)). Instead, the court is directed to undertake a structured weighing exercise under s 5(3), which lists eleven mandatory considerations. These range from the objective gravity of the index registrable offences, the passage of time, the ages of the offender and victims at the time of offending, through to the registrable person’s present circumstances including accommodation, employment needs, community integration and, in the case of a young registrable person, educational needs. The breadth of this list illustrates the Act’s hybrid character: it is protective in purpose yet requires the court to perform a proportionality analysis that resembles sentencing or administrative law merits review.
Section 8(1) enumerates four non-exhaustive categories of conduct that may be prohibited: associating with or contacting specified persons or classes of persons, being in specified locations or types of locations, engaging in specified behaviour, and being a worker (within the meaning of the ) of a specified kind. Subsection (2) makes clear that the list is not exhaustive, giving the court wide latitude to craft bespoke restraints. Orders may last up to five years for adults and two years for young registrable persons (s 6).
Current sections
Direct links to the current provisions in Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004.
young registrable person means a registrable person who is under the age of 18 years.
Note—
The Interpretation Act 1987 contains definitions and other provisions that affect the interpretation and application of this Act.
(2) For the purposes of this Act, a person poses a risk to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children or children generally if there is a risk that the person will engage in conduct that may constitute a registrable offence against or in respect of a child or children.
(3) Notes included in this Act do not form part of this Act.
s 3: Am 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [1].
Part 2
Child protection prohibition orders
Part 2 Child protection prohibition orders
Part 2 Child protection prohibition orders
4
Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
4 Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
4 Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
An application may be made by the Commissioner of Police to the Local Court for an order under this Part prohibiting a registrable person from engaging in specified conduct.
Note—
Part 4 of the Local Court Act 2007 sets out the procedures for the making and hearing of applications and confers rights to appeal against the granting of prohibition orders.
s 4: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 1.8 [1], 2.
5
Local Court may make child protection prohibition order
5 Local Court may make child protection prohibition order
5 Local Court may make child protection prohibition order
(1) The Local Court may make a child protection prohibition order prohibiting a person from engaging in conduct specified in the order if it is satisfied that the person is a registrable person and that, on the balance of probabilities:
(a) there is reasonable cause to believe, having regard to the nature and pattern of conduct of the person, that the person poses a risk to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children, or children generally, and
(b) the making of the order will reduce that risk.
(2) The Local Court may make an order under this section against a young registrable person only if, in addition to the matters set out in subsection (1), it is satisfied that all other reasonably appropriate means of managing the conduct of the person have been considered before the order was sought.
(3) In determining whether to make an order under this section against a registrable person, the Local Court is to consider the following:
(a) the seriousness of each offence with respect to which the person is a registrable person,
(b) the period of time since those offences were committed,
(c) the age of the person when those offences were committed,
(d) the age of each victim of the offences when they were committed,
(e) the difference in age between the person and each such victim,
(f) the person’s present age,
(g) the seriousness of the person’s total criminal record,
(h) the effect of the order sought on the person in comparison with the level of the risk that a further registrable offence may be committed by the person,
(i) to the extent that they relate to the conduct sought to be prohibited, the circumstances of the person, including the person’s accommodation, employment needs and integration into the community,
(j) in the case of a young registrable person, the educational needs of the person,
(k) any other matters it thinks relevant.
(4) The Local Court is not required to be satisfied that the person is likely to pose a risk to a particular child or children or a particular class of children.
(5) If a registrable person against whom an order is sought is already subject to a prohibition order and no application has been made to revoke the existing order, the Local Court must, if it decides to make the order:
(a) revoke the existing order and replace it with a new order (which may contain matters relating to the existing order), or
(b) vary the existing order to include the matters with respect to which it has decided to make the order.
(6) An order is not invalidated by a failure to comply with subsection (5).
s 5: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 2, 3.
6
Term of prohibition orders
6 Term of prohibition orders
6 Term of prohibition orders
The Local Court must specify the term of a prohibition order (other than an interim prohibition order) being a term of not more than 5 years or, in the case of a young registrable person, not more than 2 years, after it is made.
7
Interim prohibition orders
7 Interim prohibition orders
7 Interim prohibition orders
(1) The Local Court may make an interim child protection prohibition order prohibiting a registrable person from engaging in specified conduct if it appears to the Local Court that it is necessary to do so to prevent an immediate risk to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children, or children generally.
(2) An interim prohibition order may be made by the Local Court whether or not:
(a) the registrable person is present at the proceedings, or
(b) the registrable person has been given notice of the proceedings.
(3) The Local Court is not required to be satisfied that the person is likely to pose a risk to a particular child or children or a particular class of children.
(4) If an interim prohibition order is made by the Local Court, the Court must issue a court attendance notice requiring the registrable person to attend the Court for a further hearing of the matter as soon as practicable after the interim order is made.
(5) At the further hearing, the Local Court may confirm the prohibition order (with or without variation) or revoke it.
(6) An interim prohibition order remains in force until it is revoked or the relevant application is withdrawn or dismissed, whichever occurs first.
(7) Section 5 does not apply to an application for an order under subsection (1).
s 7: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 2, 3.
8
Conduct that may be the subject of orders
8 Conduct that may be the subject of orders
8 Conduct that may be the subject of orders
(1) A prohibition order may prohibit conduct of the following kind:
(a) associating with or other contact with specified persons or kinds of persons,
(b) being in specified locations or kinds of locations,
(2) Subsection (1) does not limit the kinds of conduct that may be prohibited by a prohibition order.
s 8: Am 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [1].
9
Explanation of orders
9 Explanation of orders
9 Explanation of orders
(1) If the Local Court makes a prohibition order, the Local Court must ensure that all reasonable steps are taken to explain to the registrable person (in language that the registrable person can readily understand):
(a) the person’s obligations under the order, and
(b) the consequences that may follow if the person fails to comply with those obligations.
(2) An order is not invalidated by a failure to comply with this section.
s 9: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 1.8 [2].
10
Orders by consent
10 Orders by consent
10 Orders by consent
(1) The Local Court may make a prohibition order (other than an interim prohibition order), without being satisfied as to the matters referred to in section 5, if the applicant and the registrable person consent to the making of the order.
(2) The Local Court may make an interim prohibition order, without being satisfied as to the matters referred to in section 7, if the applicant and the registrable person consent to the making of the order.
(3) The Local Court is not required to conduct a hearing before making an order under this section unless the Local Court is of the opinion that it is in the interests of justice to conduct the hearing.
(4) Without limiting subsection (3), in determining whether it is in the interests of justice to conduct the hearing the Local Court may have regard to the following:
(a) whether the registrable person has obtained legal advice in relation to the order concerned,
(b) whether the person:
(i) has impaired intellectual functioning, or
(ii) is subject to a guardianship order (within the meaning of the Guardianship Act 1987), or
(iii) is illiterate, or is not literate in the English language, or
(iv) is subject to some other condition that may prevent the person from understanding the effect of giving consent to the order.
(5) A registrar of the Local Court may not exercise the functions of the Local Court under this section.
s 10: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 1.8 [3], 3.
11
Variation or revocation of prohibition orders
11 Variation or revocation of prohibition orders
11 Variation or revocation of prohibition orders
(1) An application may be made to the Local Court by the Commissioner of Police or a person subject to a prohibition order for an order varying or revoking a prohibition order.
(2) The application must be accompanied by a copy of the relevant order, together with any variations to it that have been made under this Part.
(3) A person subject to a prohibition order may not make an application except by leave of the Local Court. Leave may be granted only if the Local Court is satisfied that, having regard to changes in the applicant’s circumstances since the order was granted or last varied, it is in the interests of justice that leave be granted.
(4) The Local Court may dispose of the application:
(a) by varying or revoking the prohibition order, or
(b) by dismissing the application.
(5) For the purposes of an application under this section, the respondent to an application is:
(a) in the case of an application made by the Commissioner of Police, the registrable person subject to the prohibition order, and
(b) in the case of an application made by a registrable person subject to a prohibition order, the Commissioner of Police.
s 11: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 2.
12
Notification of orders made in absence of registrable person
12 Notification of orders made in absence of registrable person
12 Notification of orders made in absence of registrable person
If the Local Court makes, varies or revokes a prohibition order, the relevant registrar of the Local Court must cause a copy of the order to be served on the person.
s 12: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 1.8 [4].
13
Contravention of orders
13 Contravention of orders
13 Contravention of orders
(1) A person who is subject to a prohibition order must not, without reasonable excuse, contravene the prohibition order.
Maximum penalty: 500 penalty units or imprisonment for 5 years, or both.
(1A) It is a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section if it is established by or on behalf of the person charged with the offence that, at the time the offence is alleged to have occurred, the person had not received a copy of the prohibition order and was otherwise unaware of the person’s obligations under the order.
(2) A police officer may, without a warrant, arrest a person if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the person has committed an offence under this section.
(3) (Repealed)
s 13: Am 2006 No 107, Sch 1.2; 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [2] [3].
14
Applications not to be determined in public
14 Applications not to be determined in public
14 Applications not to be determined in public
(1) Proceedings for an application under this Part must be heard in the absence of the public.
(2) Despite subsection (1), the Local Court hearing the proceedings may, if it considers it to be appropriate, permit persons who are not parties to the proceedings or their barristers, solicitors or representatives to be present during the hearing of the proceedings.
15
15
15
(Renumbered as sec 17A)
s 15: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 1.8 [5]. Renumbered as sec 17A, 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [2].
16
Information relating to registrable persons
16 Information relating to registrable persons
16 Information relating to registrable persons
(1) For the purposes of determining whether to make an application under this Part, or making an application under this Part, the Commissioner of Police may, by notice in writing served on a government agency, direct the government agency to provide to the Commissioner, on or before a day specified in the notice, any information held by the agency that is relevant to the assessment of the risk posed by a registrable person to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children, or children generally.
(2) A government agency is authorised and required to provide information requested under subsection (1) to the Commissioner of Police.
(3) A government agency is not required to give information that is subject to legal or other professional privilege.
Part 2A
Contact prohibition orders
Part 2A Contact prohibition orders
Part 2A Contact prohibition orders
pt 2A: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3].
16A
Definitions
16A Definitions
16A Definitions
In this Part:
contact means to communicate in person or by any other means (including by post, facsimile, telephone and email or any other form of electronic communication).
contact prohibition order means an order prohibiting a person who is a registrable person in relation to a particular registrable offence from contacting:
(a) any victim of the registrable offence who is specified in the order, or
(b) any person who was a co-offender in relation to that registrable offence who is specified in the order.
s 16A: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3].
16B
Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
16B Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
16B Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
An application may be made by the Commissioner of Police to the Local Court for a contact prohibition order against a registrable person if:
(a) the Commissioner has reasonable grounds to suspect that the registrable person will seek to contact the victim or co-offender concerned, and
(b) the registrable person is not subject to, and the Commissioner considers contact cannot be prevented by the making of, any of the following:
(iii) any court order prescribed by the regulations, and
(c) the Commissioner is satisfied that there are sufficient grounds to justify the making of the application.
Note—
Part 4 of the Local Court Act 2007 sets out the procedures for the making and hearing of applications and confers rights of appeal against the granting of contact prohibition orders.
s 16B: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3]. Am 2013 No 4, Sch 2.3; 2017 No 68, Sch 2.3.
16C
Local Court may make contact prohibition order
16C Local Court may make contact prohibition order
16C Local Court may make contact prohibition order
(1) The Local Court may make a contact prohibition order against a registrable person if:
(a) it is satisfied that there are sufficient grounds for making the order, or
(b) the Commissioner of Police and the registrable person consent to the making of the order.
(2) The Local Court must specify the term (not exceeding 12 months) of the contact prohibition order.
(3) A contact prohibition order takes effect:
(a) when the order is made, or
(b) if it is stayed under section 17A by a court to which an appeal is made but is confirmed on appeal (whether expressly or impliedly)—when it is confirmed.
(4) This section does not limit the kinds of prohibition or restriction that may be imposed on a registrable person by means of any other order or direction under this Act.
s 16C: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3]. Am 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [4].
16D
Contact prohibition order not to restrict certain contacts
16D Contact prohibition order not to restrict certain contacts
16D Contact prohibition order not to restrict certain contacts
(1) The persons specified in a contact prohibition order as persons the registrable person must not contact may not include any member of the registrable person’s close family.
(2) Despite subsection (1), a member of the registrable person’s close family may be specified in a contact prohibition order if, and only if, the Local Court considers that the following exceptional circumstances exist:
(a) if the member of the family concerned was a victim of the registrable offence committed by the registrable person—it would be contrary to the best interests of the victim for contact to occur,
(b) if the member of the family concerned was a co-offender in relation to the registrable offence committed by the registrable person—there is reasonable cause to believe (having regard to the ongoing nature and pattern of criminal activity of the registrable person) that there is a risk that contact could result in the registrable person being involved with the co-offender in the commission of a further registrable offence.
(3) In determining the best interests of a victim under subsection (2) (a), the Local Court may take into account any wishes expressed by the victim.
(4) The Local Court must make a record of its reasons for making an order under subsection (2).
(5) The failure of the Local Court to comply with subsection (4) does not invalidate the order.
(6) In this section, a registrable person’s close family includes:
(a) the registrable person’s spouse or de facto partner, and
(b) the registrable person’s parents, step-parents and grandparents, and
(c) the registrable person’s children, step-children and grandchildren, and
(d) the registrable person’s brothers and sisters, and step-brothers and step-sisters, and
(e) the registrable person’s guardians or carers, and
(f) in the case of a registrable person who is an Aboriginal person or a Torres Strait Islander—persons who are or have been part of the extended family or kin of the registrable person according to the indigenous kinship system of the registrable person’s culture.
s 16D: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3]. Am 2010 No 19, Sch 3.15 [1] [2].
16E
Variation or revocation of contact prohibition orders
16E Variation or revocation of contact prohibition orders
16E Variation or revocation of contact prohibition orders
(1) An application may be made to the Local Court by the Commissioner of Police or a person subject to a contact prohibition order for an order varying or revoking a contact prohibition order.
(2) The application must be accompanied by a copy of the relevant order, together with any variations to it that have been made under this Part.
(3) A person subject to a contact prohibition order may not make an application except by leave of the Local Court. Leave may be granted only if the Local Court is satisfied that, having regard to changes in the applicant’s circumstances since the order was made or last varied, it is in the interests of justice that leave be granted.
(4) The Local Court may dispose of the application:
(a) by varying or revoking the contact prohibition order, or
(b) by dismissing the application.
(5) For the purposes of an application under this section, the respondent to an application is:
(a) in the case of an application made by the Commissioner of Police—the registrable person subject to the contact prohibition order, and
(b) in the case of an application made by a registrable person subject to a contact prohibition order—the Commissioner of Police.
s 16E: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3].
16F
Explanation of orders
16F Explanation of orders
16F Explanation of orders
(1) If the Local Court makes a contact prohibition order, the Local Court must ensure that all reasonable steps are taken to explain to the registrable person (in language that the registrable person can readily understand):
(a) the person’s obligations under the order, and
(b) the consequences that may follow if the person fails to comply with those obligations.
(2) An order is not invalidated by a failure to comply with subsection (1).
s 16F: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3].
16G
Contravention of contact prohibition order
16G Contravention of contact prohibition order
16G Contravention of contact prohibition order
(1) A registrable person who is subject to a contact prohibition order must not, without reasonable excuse:
(a) contact or attempt to contact any victim or co-offender specified in the order, or
(b) procure another person to contact or attempt to contact that victim or co-offender.
Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units or imprisonment for 12 months, or both.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1), it is a reasonable excuse for contacting a person in contravention of a contact prohibition order if:
(a) the registrable person did so in compliance with an order of a court, or
(b) having contacted the person unintentionally, the registrable person immediately terminated the contact, or
(3) A police officer may, without a warrant, arrest a person if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the person has committed an offence under this section.
(4) This section extends to an act contravening this section done outside Australia by a person resident or domiciled in the State.
s 16G: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3]. Am 2010 No 59, Sch 2.12.
16H
Applications not to be determined in public
16H Applications not to be determined in public
16H Applications not to be determined in public
(1) Proceedings for an application under this Part must be heard in the absence of the public.
(2) Despite subsection (1), the Local Court hearing the proceedings may, if it considers it to be appropriate, permit persons who are not parties to the proceedings or their legal or other representatives to be present during the hearing of the proceedings.
s 16H: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3].
Part 3
Miscellaneous
Part 3 Miscellaneous
Part 3 Miscellaneous
17
Applications for orders against young registrable persons
17 Applications for orders against young registrable persons
17 Applications for orders against young registrable persons
The Commissioner of Police may not delegate (under section 31 of the Police Act 1990) any of the following functions unless the delegation is made to a police officer, or to police officers of a class, prescribed by the regulations:
(a) making an application for a prohibition order or contact prohibition order against a young registrable person,
(b) making an application to vary or revoke a prohibition order or contact prohibition order against a young registrable person.
s 17: Am 2006 No 94, Sch 3.3; 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [4]. Subst 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [5].
17A
Appeal does not stay order
17A Appeal does not stay order
17A Appeal does not stay order
Despite any provision of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001, an appeal under that Act against an order made under this Act does not operate to stay the operation of the order unless the court to which the appeal is made so orders.
s 17A (previously s 15): Renumbered 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [2]. Am 2015 No 15, Sch 2.4.
18
Restriction on publication of identity of registrable persons and victims
18 Restriction on publication of identity of registrable persons and victims
18 Restriction on publication of identity of registrable persons and victims
(1) A person must not publish in relation to any proceedings relating to an order under this Act:
(a) information that identifies or is reasonably likely to enable the identification of a person as the person against whom the order is sought or any such order is made,
(b) the name of any victim of a registrable offence committed by a registrable person,
(c) the name of any particular person referred to as a person at risk because of the conduct proposed to be prohibited,
(d) any matter reasonably likely to enable a person referred to in paragraph (b) or (c) to be identified.
Maximum penalty: 100 penalty units or imprisonment for 2 years, or both.
(2) This section does not apply in relation to the publication of any matter with the authority of the Local Court to which the application was made or any publication by a person of his or her name.
(3) This section does not apply in relation to the publication of any matter to any of the following persons:
(a) the registrable person,
(b) any other person or class of persons specified in the order concerned,
(c) any member of the NSW Police Force or a member of a law enforcement agency of the Commonwealth or another State or Territory (including the Australian Crime Commission) in their official capacity,
(d) any person involved in the administration of the order,
(e) any member of staff of a government agency involved in the assessment and management of a registrable person,
(f) any person for the purpose of an investigation of an alleged breach of an order or to any person involved in proceedings for any such breach,
(g) any other person to whom it is required or permitted to be disclosed pursuant to any other Act or law.
s 18: Am 2006 No 94, Sch 3.3; 2016 No 55, Sch 2.1.
19
Recognition of prohibition orders made in other jurisdictions
19 Recognition of prohibition orders made in other jurisdictions
19 Recognition of prohibition orders made in other jurisdictions
(1) Regulations may be made for or with respect to the recognition of orders made by a court of a jurisdiction other than this State (including jurisdictions outside Australia) that are similar in nature to prohibition orders (corresponding prohibition orders).
(2) In particular, regulations may be made for or with respect to the following matters:
(a) the recognition of corresponding prohibition orders in this State,
(b) applications for recognition in this State of corresponding prohibition orders,
(c) the conferral on registrars of the Local Court, or the Local Court, of jurisdiction with respect to recognition in this State of corresponding prohibition orders,
(d) the modification of corresponding prohibition orders for the purposes of recognition in this State,
(e) the effect of recognition of corresponding prohibition orders in this State,
(f) the conferral on the Local Court of jurisdiction with respect to the variation or revocation of corresponding prohibition orders.
s 19: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 1.8 [6].
20
Nature of proceedings for offences
20 Nature of proceedings for offences
20 Nature of proceedings for offences
(1) Proceedings for an offence under this Act (except an offence under section 13) or the regulations may be dealt with summarily before the Local Court.
(2) Chapter 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (which relates to the summary disposal of certain indictable offences unless an election is made to proceed on indictment) applies to and in respect of an offence under section 13.
s 20: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 2; 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [6] [7].
21
Regulations
21 Regulations
21 Regulations
(1) The Governor may make regulations, not inconsistent with this Act, for or with respect to any matter that by this Act is required or permitted to be prescribed or that is necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to this Act.
(2) A regulation may create an offence punishable by a penalty not exceeding 50 penalty units.
22
22
22 (Repealed)
23
Savings and transitional provisions
23 Savings and transitional provisions
23 Savings and transitional provisions
Schedule 2 has effect.
24
Review of Act
24 Review of Act
24 Review of Act
(1) The Minister is to review this Act to determine whether the policy objectives of the Act remain valid and whether the terms of the Act remain appropriate for securing those objectives.
(2) The review is to be undertaken as soon as possible after the period of 5 years from the date of assent to this Act.
(3) A report on the outcome of the review is to be tabled in each House of Parliament within 12 months after the end of the period of 5 years.
Schedule 1
Schedule 1
Schedule 1 (Repealed)
sch 1: Rep 2006 No 58, Sch 4.
Schedule 2
Savings and transitional provisions
Schedule 2 Savings and transitional provisions
Schedule 2 Savings and transitional provisions
(Section 23)
sch 2: Am 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [5]; 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [8]–[12].
Part 4
Provisions consequent on enactment of Child Protection Legislation Amendment (Offenders Registration and Prohibition Orders) Act 2013
Part 4 Provisions consequent on enactment of Child Protection Legislation Amendment (Offenders Registration and Prohibition Orders) Act 2013
This Act is the Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004.
2 Commencement
2 Commencement
2 Commencement
This Act commences on a day or days to be appointed by proclamation.
3 Definitions
3 Definitions
3 Definitions
(1) In this Act:
child means any person who is under the age of 18 years.
conduct includes an act or omission or a course of conduct.
contact prohibition order means a contact prohibition order made under section 16C.
exercise a function includes perform a duty.
function includes a power, authority or a duty.
government agency includes any public or local authority.
interim prohibition order means an interim child protection prohibition order granted under section 7.
prohibition order means a child protection prohibition order granted under section 5, and includes an interim prohibition order.
registrable offence has the same meaning as in the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000.
registrable person has the same meaning as in the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000.
young registrable person means a registrable person who is under the age of 18 years.
Note—
The Interpretation Act 1987 contains definitions and other provisions that affect the interpretation and application of this Act.
(2) For the purposes of this Act, a person poses a risk to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children or children generally if there is a risk that the person will engage in conduct that may constitute a registrable offence against or in respect of a child or children.
(3) Notes included in this Act do not form part of this Act.
s 3: Am 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [1].
Part 2 Child protection prohibition orders
Part 2 Child protection prohibition orders
Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012
The Act also provides a fast-track interim order mechanism in s 7. An interim prohibition order may be made ex parte if the court considers it necessary to prevent an immediate risk. It remains in force until the full hearing, withdrawal or dismissal of the application (s 7(6)). At the return date the court may confirm, vary or revoke the interim order. Section 10 permits consent orders without the court needing to be satisfied of the s 5 or s 7 criteria, although the court must still consider whether a hearing is required in the interests of justice, having regard to matters such as impaired intellectual functioning, guardianship orders, illiteracy or language barriers (s 10(4)).
Part 2A, inserted by the Child Protection Legislation (Registrable Persons) Amendment Act 2009, creates a distinct species of contact prohibition order. Under s 16C the Local Court may prohibit a registrable person from contacting a specified victim or co-offender of a particular registrable offence. The maximum duration is 12 months (s 16C(2)). The power is conditioned on the Commissioner holding reasonable grounds to suspect future contact will be sought and on the unavailability or unsuitability of other supervisory orders (s 16B(b)). Section 16D imposes a prima facie prohibition on including close family members in a contact prohibition order, with a narrow exceptional-circumstances gateway that requires the court to record reasons (s 16D(4)), although failure to do so does not invalidate the order (s 16D(5)).
Information-gathering powers are conferred on the Commissioner by s 16. A written notice can compel any government agency (including local authorities) to supply any relevant information in its possession, subject only to legal professional privilege (s 16(3)). The agency is both authorised and required to comply. This provision operationalises a whole-of-government risk-assessment model that underpins the Act’s preventive philosophy.
Enforcement is primarily criminal. Section 13(1) makes it an offence punishable by 500 penalty units or five years’ imprisonment, or both, to contravene a prohibition order without reasonable excuse. A statutory defence of non-receipt and lack of awareness is provided in s 13(1A). Section 16G creates a lower-order offence for breaching a contact prohibition order (50 penalty units or 12 months’ imprisonment). Both offences are arrestable without warrant on reasonable suspicion (ss 13(2) and 16G(3)). Proceedings for the s 13 offence are dealt with on indictment unless an election is made, while other offences are summary (s 20).
The Act contains procedural safeguards. Applications are heard in closed court (ss 14 and 16H), although the court may permit non-parties if appropriate. Orders made in the absence of the registrable person must be served (s 12). The court must take reasonable steps to explain the order’s obligations and consequences in language the person can understand (ss 9 and 16F); non-compliance does not invalidate the order. Appeals lie under the Local Court Act 2007 but do not stay the order unless the appellate court so directs (s 17A). Variation and revocation are possible on application by either the Commissioner or the subject, although a registrable person requires leave based on changed circumstances (ss 11 and 16E).
Recognition of interstate and overseas orders is left to the regulations (s 19), which may modify such orders for local operation and confer jurisdiction on the Local Court to vary or revoke them. Schedule 2 contains savings and transitional provisions that ensure the Act applies to persons who were already registrable before commencement and that preserve the operation of earlier versions of provisions for contraventions or applications occurring before amendments.
In short, the Act creates a flexible, court-supervised system of conduct and contact restraints that is triggered by registration status rather than by fresh criminal conduct. It prioritises child protection through risk management while embedding proportionality, procedural fairness and information-sharing mechanisms.
Who it affects
The primary cohort is the class of registrable persons and young registrable persons as defined by cross-reference to the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000. This includes anyone convicted of a registrable offence (typically sexual offences against children, child pornography, and certain violent offences with a sexual element) who is required to keep police informed of their address, employment and other personal details for a statutory period.
The Act casts a particularly sharp focus on young registrable persons—those under 18. Section 5(2) prohibits an order against a young person unless the court is satisfied that all other reasonably appropriate means of managing their conduct have been considered. Section 17 restricts the Commissioner’s power to delegate the making of applications or variation applications against young persons; delegation is permitted only to officers or classes prescribed by regulation. The mandatory considerations in s 5(3) expressly include the young person’s educational needs (s 5(3)(j)), underscoring a legislative preference for least-interventionist responses for minors.
The Commissioner of Police is both the gatekeeper and the applicant of first resort. Only the Commissioner (or a duly delegated officer) may initiate applications for prohibition orders (s 4), contact prohibition orders (s 16B) or applications to vary or revoke them. The Commissioner is also the recipient of compulsory information from government agencies under s 16 and is the respondent when a registrable person seeks variation or revocation. The non-delegation rule in s 17 for young-person matters reflects parliamentary concern that decisions affecting children who offend should be taken at a senior level.
Government agencies—defined broadly to include any public or local authority—are under a statutory duty to supply risk-relevant information when directed (s 16(2)). The obligation is subject only to privilege; there is no public-interest immunity or confidentiality carve-out. This transforms agencies that would otherwise operate under their own secrecy regimes into active participants in the offender-risk-assessment process.
The Local Court occupies the central adjudicative role. It must conduct closed hearings (s 14), ensure explanatory obligations are met (s 9), consider the lengthy list of factors in s 5(3), and, for contact prohibition orders, decide whether exceptional circumstances justify including close family members (s 16D). Registrars are expressly barred from exercising consent-order functions under s 10(5). The court also possesses ancillary powers to revoke and replace overlapping orders (s 5(5)), to stay or not stay orders on appeal (s 17A), and to authorise publication that would otherwise breach the suppression regime in s 18.
Victims and co-offenders are indirectly but materially affected. A contact prohibition order can prohibit the registrable person from contacting them, but only if they are not close family unless exceptional circumstances are found (s 16D). Victims’ wishes may be taken into account when the court assesses the best interests of a child victim who is also a family member (s 16D(3)). Section 18 imposes a broad suppression order on the publication of any material that could identify a registrable person who is the subject of proceedings, any victim, or any person said to be at risk. The prohibition carries a maximum penalty of 100 penalty units or two years’ imprisonment and is subject to a carefully drafted list of exceptions covering law-enforcement, administration of the order, and authorised disclosures.
Legal representatives, support persons and the public are affected by the closed-court rule. While the default is that proceedings occur in the absence of the public, the court retains discretion to admit non-parties or their representatives if it considers it appropriate (ss 14(2) and 16H(2)). This balances transparency against the sensitivity of risk assessments that may involve intimate details of past offending and current living arrangements.
Finally, employers and prospective employers in child-related work are affected because an order may prohibit the registrable person from being a “worker” of a specified kind (s 8(1)(d)). Because such an order is a matter of public record once served, it operates as a de facto disqualification from roles that would otherwise be regulated under the Working with Children Check regime.
Key duties and rights
Registrable persons bear the heaviest burden. Their primary duty is absolute compliance with the terms of any prohibition order or contact prohibition order to which they are subject. The statute provides no general “reasonable excuse” defence for contact prohibition orders beyond the three specific examples in s 16G(2)—compliance with a court order, unintentional contact that is immediately terminated, or contact with a co-offender while in strict government custody. For ordinary prohibition orders the defence is broader but still requires the accused to establish the excuse on the balance of probabilities.
Registrable persons have a right to be heard before a final order is made, although an interim order may be granted ex parte (s 7(2)). They are entitled to an explanation of the order in comprehensible language (ss 9 and 16F), although breach of that obligation does not invalidate the order. They may apply for variation or revocation but only with leave if they were the original subject (ss 11(3) and 16E(3)); leave turns on changed circumstances and the interests of justice. Consent orders under s 10 attract additional procedural protections: the court must consider whether the person had legal advice and whether any cognitive, linguistic or guardianship factors impair genuine consent.
The Commissioner of Police owes duties of procedural fairness when seeking orders, although the statute modifies these through the closed-court and ex-parte provisions. The Commissioner must serve a copy of any order made in the person’s absence (s 12) and must supply a copy of the order (and all variations) when applying to vary or revoke (ss 11(2) and 16E(2)). When seeking a contact prohibition order the Commissioner must hold reasonable grounds for suspecting future contact and must consider whether other supervisory orders could achieve the same end (s 16B).
Government agencies are under a positive duty to provide information when lawfully directed (s 16(2)). They enjoy a limited protection in that they need not disclose legally privileged material.
The Local Court is subject to a suite of mandatory procedural duties: to consider the s 5(3) factors, to record reasons when making a family-member contact prohibition order (s 16D(4)), to ensure explanatory steps are taken, and to apply the closed-court rule unless it affirmatively decides otherwise. The court’s obligation to weigh the effect of the proposed order on the registrable person against the residual risk (s 5(3)(h)) creates a statutory proportionality duty that can be tested on appeal.
Victims have no formal party status but their wishes may be taken into account in the exceptional-circumstances test under s 16D(3). They are protected by the non-publication regime in s 18, which survives the proceedings and applies to any matter reasonably likely to identify them.
All persons enjoy the protection of the non-publication rule in s 18, subject to the statutory exceptions that permit disclosure to police, corrective services, those administering the order, or pursuant to another statutory obligation.
Penalties and enforcement
The centrepiece enforcement provision is s 13. Contravention of a prohibition order without reasonable excuse carries a maximum penalty of 500 penalty units (currently $55,000) or five years’ imprisonment, or both. The offence is indictable but may be dealt with summarily unless an election is made (s 20(2)). The statutory defence in s 13(1A) places the onus on the defendant to prove non-receipt and lack of knowledge of the order’s obligations. This reverses the usual presumption that service is effective once formal requirements are met.
Contact prohibition order breaches are treated as less serious, carrying 50 penalty units or 12 months’ imprisonment (s 16G(1)). The statute expressly extends extraterritorial operation to acts done outside Australia by a person resident or domiciled in New South Wales (s 16G(4)), an unusual provision that reflects concern about offenders attempting to circumvent orders by electronic means from overseas.
Both offences are arrestable without warrant (ss 13(2) and 16G(3)). This enables immediate police intervention when a breach is suspected, consistent with the protective purpose of the legislation.
Breach of the non-publication regime in s 18 is a summary offence carrying 100 penalty units or two years’ imprisonment. The offence is drafted in wide terms, capturing any publication that identifies or is reasonably likely to enable identification of the registrable person, a victim, or a person said to be at risk. Exceptions are numerous and pragmatic: publication with court authority, self-identification by the registrable person, and disclosure to law-enforcement, corrective services, government agencies involved in risk management, or persons investigating breaches.
The Act does not create a civil remedy for breach. Enforcement is therefore binary: either criminal prosecution or an application to vary or revoke the order. The power to arrest without warrant, coupled with the serious maximum penalties, gives the regime real teeth. In practice, prosecutions for breach often rely on real-time intelligence sharing between police and other agencies, leveraging the information powers in s 16.
How it interacts with other laws
The Act is deliberately woven into a broader protective ecosystem. Its definitional backbone is supplied by the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000: the terms “registrable offence” and “registrable person” are imported wholesale (s 3(1)). This linkage means that every person on the NSW child sex offender register is potentially subject to prohibition orders for the duration of their registration period.
There is an express hierarchical relationship with high-risk offender supervision legislation. Section 16B(b) prevents a contact prohibition order being sought if the Commissioner considers that contact can be prevented by an extended supervision order under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 or the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017, or by a prohibition order already in force. This ensures that the least intrusive or most comprehensive order is preferred.
The Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 is engaged through s 8(1)(d), which permits an order to prohibit the person from being a “worker” in a specified child-related role. Such an order operates as an additional disqualification beyond any automatic or discretionary bar arising from a Working with Children Check.
Procedural matters are governed by the Local Court Act 2007 (Part 4) and the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001. Appeals do not stay the order unless the appellate court orders otherwise (s 17A), reversing the usual presumption in s 63 of the latter Act. This “no automatic stay” rule reflects the priority given to child protection over the interests of the appellant.
Information sharing under s 16 overrides ordinary confidentiality constraints but is itself constrained by legal professional privilege. The provision interacts with secrecy provisions in statutes such as the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 by supplying an express statutory authority that constitutes both an authorisation and a requirement to disclose.
The Interpretation Act 1987 supplies definitions of “function”, “exercise a function”, “de facto partner” and other terms, as noted in the interpretive note to s 3(1). The Guardianship Act 1987 is relevant to the consent-order safeguards in s 10(4)(b)(ii).
Finally, the Act’s transitional provisions in Schedule 2 ensure continuity across its multiple amending statutes, most notably the 2009 and 2013 Acts that introduced contact prohibition orders and refined the young-person delegation rules.
Recent changes and why
Although the provided text reflects the Act as amended up to 2016, three clusters of change are visible on the face of the statute and are essential to understanding its current operation.
The 2009 amendments (Child Protection Legislation (Registrable Persons) Amendment Act 2009) inserted the entire Part 2A contact prohibition order regime. The impetus was a recognition that general conduct orders were sometimes too blunt an instrument to deal with the specific risk of re-victimisation or continued association with co-offenders. The new Part introduced shorter maximum durations (12 months), a more targeted test focused on a particular registrable offence, and the close-family prima-facie prohibition in s 16D. These changes narrowed the scope of restraint in some respects while expanding the overall toolkit available to police.
The 2013 amendments (Child Protection Legislation Amendment (Offenders Registration and Prohibition Orders) Act 2013) made three substantive alterations. First, they increased the maximum penalty for breach of a prohibition order from 100 penalty units and two years to its current 500 penalty units and five years, signalling legislative dissatisfaction with the deterrent effect of the earlier sanction. Second, they substituted a new s 17 that tightened delegation rules for applications involving young registrable persons. Third, they adjusted the consent-order and appeal provisions to align more closely with contemporary court practice.
Later miscellaneous amendments refined definitions (for example, updating cross-references to the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017) and clarified that the non-publication rule in s 18 does not prevent a person publishing their own name.
These changes reflect a recurring legislative pattern: start with a relatively modest civil order regime, monitor its operation, then incrementally increase both its reach (new order types, broader information powers) and its bite (higher penalties, tighter delegation controls, no automatic stays on appeal). The underlying policy driver has remained constant—community concern about the risk posed by convicted child sex offenders living in the community after their sentences expire.
Court challenges and controversies
Because the Act operates in the civil jurisdiction of the Local Court and most final orders are not published, reported case law is sparse. Nevertheless, several recurring legal issues have emerged in appellate and judicial review proceedings.
First, the “reasonable cause to believe” threshold in s 5(1)(a) has been challenged on the basis that it is too imprecise to ground a serious restraint on liberty. Courts have consistently held that the civil standard, coupled with the mandatory s 5(3) checklist, supplies sufficient certainty. The absence of any requirement to prove likely risk to a particular child has survived challenge on proportionality grounds, the courts emphasising the preventive, protective purpose of the legislation.
Second, the interaction between prohibition orders and extended supervision orders under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 has generated dispute. Defendants have argued that once an extended supervision order is in place, a prohibition order is duplicative and therefore not “necessary”. The statute’s language in s 16B(b)(i) now expressly requires the Commissioner to consider whether contact “cannot be prevented” by an extended supervision order, giving statutory form to this debate.
Third, the closed-court provisions and the breadth of the s 18 non-publication rule have been tested against implied freedom of political communication and open justice principles. Appellate courts have upheld the provisions on the basis that they are reasonably appropriate and adapted to the legitimate end of protecting children and encouraging the flow of sensitive risk information from government agencies.
Controversies in the public domain have tended to focus on two issues. The first is the potential for orders to operate as de facto punishment long after sentences have been served, particularly when an order prohibits residence in entire suburbs or contact with all persons under 18. The second is the information-sharing power in s 16, which has been criticised by privacy advocates as creating a “surveillance web” that captures agencies not traditionally involved in law enforcement. These debates have not resulted in successful constitutional or human-rights invalidity claims, largely because the Act is framed as protective rather than punitive and because New South Wales lacks a statutory charter of rights.
In the expert community there is ongoing discussion about whether the Act’s reliance on the registration threshold is over-inclusive. A person convicted of a single offence many years ago who has otherwise led a law-abiding life may still be exposed to an order if police can point to a pattern of conduct or new intelligence. The s 5(3) factors are intended to mitigate this risk, but their application in busy Local Court lists can sometimes appear formulaic.
Gotchas
Most practitioners underestimate the breadth of the s 16 information-gathering power. Because it is triggered merely by the Commissioner’s desire to “determine whether to make an application”, it can lawfully be used as an intelligence-gathering device long before any court proceeding is on foot. There is no statutory requirement that the Commissioner hold a reasonable suspicion at the notice stage; the only limit is relevance to risk assessment and privilege. Agencies that routinely refuse police requests on confidentiality grounds are sometimes surprised to learn that refusal is not an option once a formal s 16 notice is served.
Another trap lies in the interaction between contact prohibition orders and family law. Section 16D(1) creates a prima-facie rule against including close family members, yet the exceptional-circumstances gateway in s 16D(2)(a) is framed by reference to the “best interests of the victim”. This language echoes but does not replicate the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) best-interests test. A Family Court parenting order that expressly permits contact can still be overridden by a contact prohibition order if the Local Court finds exceptional circumstances, yet the Local Court must record reasons and the failure to do so, while not invalidating the order, may expose it to successful appeal. Practitioners acting for respondents should therefore obtain both sets of orders and carefully advise on which prevails.
The “without reasonable excuse” element in s 13(1) is narrower than it first appears. While the statute does not define the phrase, the existence of a specific statutory defence in s 13(1A) for non-receipt strongly suggests that courts will construe “reasonable excuse” objectively and narrowly. An offender who claims that compliance would cause them to lose their job or housing will likely fail unless they can show that they first sought variation under s 11. The onus is on the defendant, and the maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment makes these matters high-stakes.
For young registrable persons the delegation restriction in s 17 is absolute unless the regulations prescribe otherwise. Many police prosecutors have been caught out by assuming that a general delegation under the Police Act 1990 suffices. If the application is made by an officer outside the prescribed class, the Local Court lacks jurisdiction and the proceeding is a nullity—an outcome that can be fatal if the limitation period for fresh proceedings has expired.
Finally, the extraterritorial reach of s 16G(4) for contact prohibition order breaches is rarely appreciated. An offender who travels to another state or country and uses social media to contact a victim can be prosecuted in New South Wales provided they remain resident or domiciled here. This provision interacts with Commonwealth telecommunications legislation and can create parallel federal and state proceedings. Compliance professionals advising high-profile or itinerant registrable persons must therefore build international travel and electronic communication protocols into any risk-management plan.
How to comply
Compliance begins with rigorous identification of registrable status. Any person subject to the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 should treat themselves as potentially within the scope of this Act for the entire registration period. Upon receipt of any s 16 notice from the Commissioner, government agencies should have pre-prepared templates that capture the precise information sought while redacting only privileged material. A centralised “s 16 register” within each agency, coupled with training for FOI and legal staff, is advisable.
For registrable persons themselves, the most effective compliance strategy is proactive engagement. If circumstances have changed—new employment, stable accommodation, completed treatment programs—an application for variation or revocation under s 11 or s 16E should be prepared with affidavit evidence that directly addresses the s 5(3) factors. Legal advice at this stage is critical; the s 10(4) criteria that the court considers when deciding whether to hold a hearing on a consent order expressly include whether the person has obtained legal advice.
Organisations that employ or house registrable persons should maintain up-to-date copies of any prohibition orders and embed the order’s restrictions into workplace policies and accommodation rules. A breach by the individual can expose the organisation to reputational damage and, in some cases, civil liability if it can be shown that the organisation knowingly facilitated the breach. Child-related employers must cross-reference any prohibition order against the Working with Children Check regime; an order under s 8(1)(d) operates as an automatic disqualification.
Police and corrective services personnel responsible for monitoring registrable persons should develop information-sharing protocols that satisfy s 16 while respecting the privilege exception. Regular inter-agency risk-assessment meetings reduce the likelihood that fresh intelligence will be interpreted as requiring an immediate interim order application.
Finally, all parties should treat the explanatory obligation in ss 9 and 16F as a substantive rather than formal requirement. Even though non-compliance does not invalidate the order, a court asked to impose the maximum penalty for breach will look sceptically at a prosecutor who cannot demonstrate that genuine efforts were made to ensure the registrable person understood the order in their own language. For non-English speakers or persons with cognitive impairment, this may require the engagement of accredited interpreters or simplified pictorial explanations.
In practice, the most compliant organisations and individuals are those that treat prohibition orders not as one-off court events but as living documents that must be reviewed whenever the registrable person’s personal circumstances or the risk landscape materially changes. Regular legal audit of existing orders against the evolving case law on “risk”, “reasonable cause to believe” and the proportionality factors in s 5(3) remains the single most effective risk-mitigation strategy.
Section 4Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
An application may be made by the Commissioner of Police to the Local Court for an order under this Part prohibiting a registrable person from engaging in specified conduct.
Note—
Part 4 of the Local Court Act 2007 sets out the procedures for the making and hearing of applications and confers rights to appeal against the granting of prohibition orders.
s 4: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 1.8 [1], 2.
5 Local Court may make child protection prohibition order
5 Local Court may make child protection prohibition order
5 Local Court may make child protection prohibition order
(1) The Local Court may make a child protection prohibition order prohibiting a person from engaging in conduct specified in the order if it is satisfied that the person is a registrable person and that, on the balance of probabilities:
(a) there is reasonable cause to believe, having regard to the nature and pattern of conduct of the person, that the person poses a risk to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children, or children generally, and
(b) the making of the order will reduce that risk.
(2) The Local Court may make an order under this section against a young registrable person only if, in addition to the matters set out in subsection (1), it is satisfied that all other reasonably appropriate means of managing the conduct of the person have been considered before the order was sought.
(3) In determining whether to make an order under this section against a registrable person, the Local Court is to consider the following:
(a) the seriousness of each offence with respect to which the person is a registrable person,
(b) the period of time since those offences were committed,
(c) the age of the person when those offences were committed,
(d) the age of each victim of the offences when they were committed,
(e) the difference in age between the person and each such victim,
(f) the person’s present age,
(g) the seriousness of the person’s total criminal record,
(h) the effect of the order sought on the person in comparison with the level of the risk that a further registrable offence may be committed by the person,
(i) to the extent that they relate to the conduct sought to be prohibited, the circumstances of the person, including the person’s accommodation, employment needs and integration into the community,
(j) in the case of a young registrable person, the educational needs of the person,
(k) any other matters it thinks relevant.
(4) The Local Court is not required to be satisfied that the person is likely to pose a risk to a particular child or children or a particular class of children.
(5) If a registrable person against whom an order is sought is already subject to a prohibition order and no application has been made to revoke the existing order, the Local Court must, if it decides to make the order:
(a) revoke the existing order and replace it with a new order (which may contain matters relating to the existing order), or
(b) vary the existing order to include the matters with respect to which it has decided to make the order.
(6) An order is not invalidated by a failure to comply with subsection (5).
s 5: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 2, 3.
6 Term of prohibition orders
6 Term of prohibition orders
6 Term of prohibition orders
The Local Court must specify the term of a prohibition order (other than an interim prohibition order) being a term of not more than 5 years or, in the case of a young registrable person, not more than 2 years, after it is made.
7 Interim prohibition orders
7 Interim prohibition orders
7 Interim prohibition orders
(1) The Local Court may make an interim child protection prohibition order prohibiting a registrable person from engaging in specified conduct if it appears to the Local Court that it is necessary to do so to prevent an immediate risk to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children, or children generally.
(2) An interim prohibition order may be made by the Local Court whether or not:
(a) the registrable person is present at the proceedings, or
(b) the registrable person has been given notice of the proceedings.
(3) The Local Court is not required to be satisfied that the person is likely to pose a risk to a particular child or children or a particular class of children.
(4) If an interim prohibition order is made by the Local Court, the Court must issue a court attendance notice requiring the registrable person to attend the Court for a further hearing of the matter as soon as practicable after the interim order is made.
(5) At the further hearing, the Local Court may confirm the prohibition order (with or without variation) or revoke it.
(6) An interim prohibition order remains in force until it is revoked or the relevant application is withdrawn or dismissed, whichever occurs first.
(7) Section 5 does not apply to an application for an order under subsection (1).
s 7: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 2, 3.
8 Conduct that may be the subject of orders
8 Conduct that may be the subject of orders
8 Conduct that may be the subject of orders
(1) A prohibition order may prohibit conduct of the following kind:
(a) associating with or other contact with specified persons or kinds of persons,
(b) being in specified locations or kinds of locations,
(c) engaging in specified behaviour,
(d) being a worker (within the meaning of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012) of a specified kind.
(2) Subsection (1) does not limit the kinds of conduct that may be prohibited by a prohibition order.
s 8: Am 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [1].
9 Explanation of orders
9 Explanation of orders
9 Explanation of orders
(1) If the Local Court makes a prohibition order, the Local Court must ensure that all reasonable steps are taken to explain to the registrable person (in language that the registrable person can readily understand):
(a) the person’s obligations under the order, and
(b) the consequences that may follow if the person fails to comply with those obligations.
(2) An order is not invalidated by a failure to comply with this section.
s 9: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 1.8 [2].
10 Orders by consent
10 Orders by consent
10 Orders by consent
(1) The Local Court may make a prohibition order (other than an interim prohibition order), without being satisfied as to the matters referred to in section 5, if the applicant and the registrable person consent to the making of the order.
(2) The Local Court may make an interim prohibition order, without being satisfied as to the matters referred to in section 7, if the applicant and the registrable person consent to the making of the order.
(3) The Local Court is not required to conduct a hearing before making an order under this section unless the Local Court is of the opinion that it is in the interests of justice to conduct the hearing.
(4) Without limiting subsection (3), in determining whether it is in the interests of justice to conduct the hearing the Local Court may have regard to the following:
(a) whether the registrable person has obtained legal advice in relation to the order concerned,
(b) whether the person:
(i) has impaired intellectual functioning, or
(ii) is subject to a guardianship order (within the meaning of the Guardianship Act 1987), or
(iii) is illiterate, or is not literate in the English language, or
(iv) is subject to some other condition that may prevent the person from understanding the effect of giving consent to the order.
(5) A registrar of the Local Court may not exercise the functions of the Local Court under this section.
s 10: Am 2007 No 94, Schs 1.8 [3], 3.
11 Variation or revocation of prohibition orders
11 Variation or revocation of prohibition orders
11 Variation or revocation of prohibition orders
(1) An application may be made to the Local Court by the Commissioner of Police or a person subject to a prohibition order for an order varying or revoking a prohibition order.
(2) The application must be accompanied by a copy of the relevant order, together with any variations to it that have been made under this Part.
(3) A person subject to a prohibition order may not make an application except by leave of the Local Court. Leave may be granted only if the Local Court is satisfied that, having regard to changes in the applicant’s circumstances since the order was granted or last varied, it is in the interests of justice that leave be granted.
(4) The Local Court may dispose of the application:
(a) by varying or revoking the prohibition order, or
(b) by dismissing the application.
(5) For the purposes of an application under this section, the respondent to an application is:
(a) in the case of an application made by the Commissioner of Police, the registrable person subject to the prohibition order, and
(b) in the case of an application made by a registrable person subject to a prohibition order, the Commissioner of Police.
s 11: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 2.
12 Notification of orders made in absence of registrable person
12 Notification of orders made in absence of registrable person
12 Notification of orders made in absence of registrable person
If the Local Court makes, varies or revokes a prohibition order, the relevant registrar of the Local Court must cause a copy of the order to be served on the person.
s 12: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 1.8 [4].
13 Contravention of orders
13 Contravention of orders
13 Contravention of orders
(1) A person who is subject to a prohibition order must not, without reasonable excuse, contravene the prohibition order.
Maximum penalty: 500 penalty units or imprisonment for 5 years, or both.
(1A) It is a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section if it is established by or on behalf of the person charged with the offence that, at the time the offence is alleged to have occurred, the person had not received a copy of the prohibition order and was otherwise unaware of the person’s obligations under the order.
(2) A police officer may, without a warrant, arrest a person if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the person has committed an offence under this section.
(3) (Repealed)
s 13: Am 2006 No 107, Sch 1.2; 2013 No 77, Sch 1 [2] [3].
14 Applications not to be determined in public
14 Applications not to be determined in public
14 Applications not to be determined in public
(1) Proceedings for an application under this Part must be heard in the absence of the public.
(2) Despite subsection (1), the Local Court hearing the proceedings may, if it considers it to be appropriate, permit persons who are not parties to the proceedings or their barristers, solicitors or representatives to be present during the hearing of the proceedings.
15
15
(Renumbered as sec 17A)
s 15: Am 2007 No 94, Sch 1.8 [5]. Renumbered as sec 17A, 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [2].
16 Information relating to registrable persons
16 Information relating to registrable persons
16 Information relating to registrable persons
(1) For the purposes of determining whether to make an application under this Part, or making an application under this Part, the Commissioner of Police may, by notice in writing served on a government agency, direct the government agency to provide to the Commissioner, on or before a day specified in the notice, any information held by the agency that is relevant to the assessment of the risk posed by a registrable person to the lives or sexual safety of one or more children, or children generally.
(2) A government agency is authorised and required to provide information requested under subsection (1) to the Commissioner of Police.
(3) A government agency is not required to give information that is subject to legal or other professional privilege.
Part 2A Contact prohibition orders
Part 2A Contact prohibition orders
Part 2A Contact prohibition orders
pt 2A: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3].
16A Definitions
16A Definitions
16A Definitions
In this Part:
contact means to communicate in person or by any other means (including by post, facsimile, telephone and email or any other form of electronic communication).
contact prohibition order means an order prohibiting a person who is a registrable person in relation to a particular registrable offence from contacting:
(a) any victim of the registrable offence who is specified in the order, or
(b) any person who was a co-offender in relation to that registrable offence who is specified in the order.
s 16A: Ins 2009 No 93, Sch 2 [3].
16B Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
16B Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
16B Commissioner of Police may apply for orders
An application may be made by the Commissioner o
This is an opening excerpt, not the complete document.