Bail Laws in Australia: How Every State and Territory Compares

Bail in Australia is not one law. Each of the 6 states and 2 territories runs its own Bail Act, or in Tasmania's case mainly a different Act altogether, with its own test, its own list of offences that reverse the ordinary presumption, and its own rules for reapplying after a refusal, so there is no single Australian bail test to state.

This article compares bail decision making across all 8 Australian states and territories: New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. It summarises the shape a bail decision shares everywhere and the point by point differences between jurisdictions; it does not restate every provision behind those differences. For the full detail and the sections behind each figure in this comparison, see the linked state or territory page for the jurisdiction that matters to you. This article does not cover a civil protection order, which is a different process from a criminal bail decision; see the Apprehended Violence Order hub for that, and the criminal law hub for the rest of this section.

The shape every Australian bail decision shares

Despite the differences described below, every Australian bail system shares a recognisable shape.

A police officer, or in some jurisdictions another authorised officer, can grant bail before a person's first court appearance in most jurisdictions, though several restrict or remove that power for the most serious charges. Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania each reserve some categories to a court or judicial officer rather than police: treason, murder and Schedule 1 offences in Victoria, the most serious Criminal Code charges in Queensland, murder, terrorism linked persons and two family violence categories in Western Australia, terror suspects in South Australia, and terrorism linked persons in Tasmania. In New South Wales and the Northern Territory, a senior police officer can make a bail decision for any offence, subject to limited exceptions tied to an earlier court decision or to the warrant the person was arrested on. In the Australian Capital Territory, police deciding bail for a family violence offence must apply a separate no danger standard (section 9F).

The starting position differs: several jurisdictions start from a presumption or entitlement in favour of bail, Western Australia starts adult bail from a discretion, and in Tasmania police apply an interests of justice standard while a justice has a bare discretion. Each jurisdiction then displaces or reverses its starting position for defined categories of offence. For a defined and generally narrow list, most jurisdictions place the burden on the accused to justify release rather than on the prosecution to justify detention. The label differs: New South Wales and Queensland call it show cause, Victoria calls it exceptional circumstances or show compelling reason depending on the offence's Schedule, Western Australia requires exceptional reasons and South Australia special circumstances for their own lists, the Australian Capital Territory distinguishes special or exceptional circumstances from a no presumption category, and the Northern Territory requires the accused to affirmatively satisfy the decision maker, with a high degree of confidence test layered on top since 7 May 2025. Tasmania's ordinary bail law has only one such category, Bail Act 1994 Part 1A, under which police cannot bail a terrorism linked person and a judge or magistrate may do so only if satisfied there are exceptional circumstances (section 4B); its Family Violence Act 2004 section 12 separately reverses the position for family violence charges.

Once a decision maker is past any threshold test, the remaining question in most jurisdictions is a variant of risk: will the person fail to appear, commit an offence, endanger someone, interfere with witnesses, or obstruct justice if released. New South Wales calls it a bail concern and unacceptable risk, Victoria and Queensland both use unacceptable risk, Western Australia and South Australia weigh similar factors without a single defined term, the Australian Capital Territory applies its general criteria, and the Northern Territory's criteria serve the same function. Tasmania again stands apart: neither Justices Act 1959 section 34, an undefined interests of justice standard for police, nor section 35, a bare discretion for a justice with no listed factors at all, contains a comparable risk checklist.

Conditions follow a similar pattern everywhere: reporting, residence, curfews, non contact and exclusion terms, sureties or their equivalent, and, in a growing number of jurisdictions, electronic monitoring. Failing to appear is a criminal offence in every jurisdiction. Whether breaching another bail condition is itself an offence differs: in New South Wales it is not a Bail Act offence, and in Tasmania a young person's breach of a condition other than failing to appear is not an offence. The maximum penalty, and whether that maximum is itself capped by the underlying charge, also differs by jurisdiction.

Bail across Australia, compared

Youth bail differences

Youth bail differs across every jurisdiction in the specific factors weighed, consistent with each one's own youth justice framework, but two developments run in opposite directions and are worth knowing before assuming a rule that applies in one state applies everywhere.

Queensland's electronic monitoring condition for young people stopped being a geographically limited trial on 30 April 2026. The Youth Justice (Electronic Monitoring) Amendment Act 2026 made it a permanent, statewide condition available for any 10 to 17 year old charged with any offence, not a narrower list of prescribed offences, subject to a suitability assessment report and monitoring services being available in the area. Victoria's equivalent, under Part 2A of the Bail Act 1977, remains a trial: it applies only to a child aged 14 to 17, or 18 if under 18 at the time of the alleged offending, whose bail is decided by the Children's Court sitting in a prescribed region or by the Supreme Court, and it covers decisions made before 22 April 2027. Western Australia's mandatory electronic monitoring condition, by contrast, cannot be imposed on anyone under 18 at all.

New South Wales section 22C, which requires a high degree of confidence before bail is granted to some 14 to 17 year olds charged with motor vehicle theft or a serious break and enter offence allegedly committed while already on bail for another such offence. It was set to be repealed on 1 October 2026; a Bill passed by the NSW Parliament on 24 September 2026, the Justice Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill (No 2) 2026, would extend it to 4 April 2028 from assent, and as at 28 September 2026 it was awaiting assent. Check the NSW legislation website for the current position.

Most jurisdictions build youth specific principles into their general criteria rather than running a wholly separate test. Victoria's section 3B and the Northern Territory's section 24A each list child specific factors such as family relationships and continuity of education, and both state that a lack of suitable or adequate accommodation cannot be the sole reason to refuse a child bail. The Australian Capital Territory's section 23 makes the best interests of the child a primary consideration, and Western Australia's Schedule 1 Part C clause 2 gives a child a qualified right to bail that depends on a responsible adult.

Recent reforms by jurisdiction, 2024 to 2026

• New South Wales: the Bail and Other Legislation Amendment (Domestic Violence) Act 2024 added 2 show cause categories from 1 July 2024. Electronic monitoring for one domestic violence show cause ground, required unless sufficient reasons exist not to impose it, commenced 11 October 2024. Electronic monitoring as a bail condition was barred in every other case from 11 June 2025 (section 30A). Registrars lost the power to decide bail from 14 March 2025, extended to all authorised justices from 28 October 2025.
• Victoria: the Bail Amendment Act 2025, No. 8 of 2025, added the community safety principle, reinstated the section 30B offence and rewrote the 24 hour rule from 26 March 2025, with its Schedule additions commencing 26 August 2025. The separate Bail Further Amendment Act 2025, No. 34 of 2025, added the section 4F repeat offending presumption from 30 September 2025 and the section 4AA(4A) show compelling reason trigger from 31 March 2026.
• Queensland: the Criminal Law (Coercive Control and Affirmative Consent) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024 amended the Bail Act's sections 6, 11 and 16 from 18 March 2024. The Making Queensland Safer Act 2024 changed youth bail factors under the Youth Justice Act, not the Bail Act, from its 13 December 2024 assent. The Youth Justice (Electronic Monitoring) Amendment Act 2026 made youth monitoring permanent and statewide from 30 April 2026.
• Western Australia: the Family Violence Legislation Reform Act 2024, assented 17 September 2024, added the clause 3G restraining order category and the mandatory electronic monitoring scheme in Schedule 1 Part E, all commencing 18 December 2024.
• South Australia: the Bail (Conditions) Amendment Act 2024 added mandatory home confinement and electronic monitoring for intervention order breaches involving violence from 1 October 2024. The Bail (Terror Suspects and Firearm Parts) Amendment Act 2024 widened the terror suspect definition from 16 December 2024. The Statutes Amendment (Recidivist Young Offenders) Act 2025 added a youth prescribed applicant category from 16 February 2026.
• Tasmania: no bail test reform in the 2024 to 2026 window. Its last structural changes were the 2018 terrorism linked person rule and the 2021 move of Supreme Court bail into the Bail Act 1994.
• Northern Territory: the Bail Legislation Amendment Act 2024, known as Declan's Law, commenced 6 January 2025. The Bail and Youth Justice Legislation Amendment Act 2025 added the high degree of confidence test from 7 May 2025.
• Australian Capital Territory: no bail test reform has yet commenced. The Bail Amendment Bill 2026, introduced 6 May 2026, remains before the Legislative Assembly as at this article's publication and is described here only as proposed.

Bail in each state and territory

• Bail in New South Wales: the Bail Act 2013 two step test, show cause offences and the 2024 to 2025 domestic violence reforms.
• Bail in Victoria: the Bail Act 1977 Schedule based test, unacceptable risk, and the 2025 to 2026 reforms.
• Bail in Queensland: the Bail Act 1980 unacceptable risk and show cause tests, and permanent statewide youth electronic monitoring.
• Bail in Western Australia: the Bail Act 1982 test and the 2024 mandatory electronic monitoring reforms.
• Bail in South Australia: the Bail Act 1985 test, prescribed applicants and special circumstances.
• Bail in Tasmania: why the real test sits in the Justices Act 1959, not the Bail Act 1994.
• Bail in the Northern Territory: the Bail Act 1982 and the high degree of confidence test.
• Bail in the Australian Capital Territory: the Bail Act 1992, its presumptions, and the pending 2026 reform Bill.

For how coercive control specifically affects a bail decision where the offence exists, see coercive control laws in Australia. For the criminal law section overview, see the Australia criminal law hub. If you are facing a bail decision or a possible breach, legal aid can point you to your state or territory's legal aid commission and a lawyer; nothing on this page is a substitute for that advice.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there one national bail law in Australia?

No. Bail is decided under state and territory law: each of the 6 states and 2 territories has its own Bail Act, or in Tasmania's case mainly relies on a different Act, with its own test, its own list of offences that reverse the ordinary presumption, and its own breach and reapplication rules. The one Commonwealth overlay is narrow: for certain Commonwealth offences, such as terrorism offences, section 15AA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) requires exceptional circumstances before bail is granted.

Which Australian jurisdictions require the accused to show cause for bail?

New South Wales and Queensland both use the term show cause for a defined list of offences. Victoria's equivalent is exceptional circumstances or show compelling reason depending on the offence's Schedule. Western Australia requires exceptional reasons and South Australia special circumstances for their own defined lists, the Australian Capital Territory requires special or exceptional circumstances for defined categories, and the Northern Territory requires the accused to affirmatively satisfy the decision maker under section 7A, with a high degree of confidence test added from 7 May 2025. Tasmania has no general reversed onus category apart from its terrorism linked person rule (Bail Act 1994 section 4B) and its family violence rule (Family Violence Act 2004 section 12).

Which states let you reapply for bail without showing new facts?

Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory impose no general new facts requirement on a repeat bail application. New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory each require new facts, changed circumstances or a similar gateway, though Victoria also allows an unconditional first or second application and Western Australia allows one application to a judge without that showing.

Does every state require electronic monitoring as a bail condition?

No. New South Wales requires it, unless sufficient reasons exist not to, only for one specific domestic violence show cause ground and bans it in every other case. Western Australia, unless there are exceptional circumstances, and South Australia each made it mandatory for defined family violence categories from 2024. The Australian Capital Territory has no standalone electronic monitoring bail condition at all, and Western Australia's condition cannot be imposed on anyone under 18.

Does coercive control affect a bail decision?

Only in a jurisdiction where a coercive control offence is actually in force and charged. It is a show cause offence in New South Wales, and a relevant offence category can bring a charge within Queensland's show cause list. See coercive control laws in Australia for which jurisdictions currently have the offence in force.

What happens if I breach bail?

Failing to appear is a criminal offence in every jurisdiction. Whether breaching another bail condition is itself an offence differs: it is not a Bail Act offence in New South Wales, and in Tasmania a young person's breach of a condition other than failing to appear is not an offence. The maximum fine differs sharply, from a few thousand dollars in Tasmania, New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland to 10,000 dollars or more in Western Australia, South Australia, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory, and New South Wales, South Australia and the Northern Territory each cap the penalty actually imposed at the maximum for the underlying charge rather than letting the bail breach penalty stand alone. See the comparison table above, or the relevant state or territory page, for the figure that applies to a specific charge.