Recording Phone Calls in Queensland

In Queensland, recording your own phone call is outside the state listening-device offence entirely, not merely excused by an exception. As in Victoria, the bigger practical risk sits in what happens to the recording afterward.

Information last verified on 22 July 2026 against the consolidated Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld) and Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth) text. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses recording a phone call under the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld) and the federal Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth). It does not address the phone-call recording rules of other Australian states or territories; for a national comparison, see can you record a phone call in Australia.

The Federal Law Question First

Before reaching state law, it is worth ruling out the federal wiretap offence. The Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth) prohibits intercepting a communication passing over a telecommunications system (s 7(1)). Interception is defined as listening to or recording a communication "in its passage over that telecommunications system without the knowledge of the person making the communication" (s 6(1)). A participant recording their own call has knowledge of it, and the recording happens at the point of receipt rather than in transit across the network, so this federal offence generally targets a third party tapping the line, not a person recording their own conversation.

Recording Your Own Call in Queensland

Section 43(1) of the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld) makes it an offence to use a listening device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation, but s 43(2) exempts a person who is a party to that conversation. A phone call is a private conversation for these purposes, so recording your own call places you squarely within the s 43(2) exemption, the same mechanism that applies to an in-person conversation you take part in. This is a similar structural position to Victoria, and different from New South Wales, where recording your own call is prohibited by default and then excused by a separate exception.

Recording a Call You're Not Part Of

Where you record a call between other people without being a party to it, s 43(1) applies without the benefit of the s 43(2) exemption. The Act's definition of "private conversation" does carve out circumstances where a party ought reasonably expect the conversation might be overheard, recorded, monitored or listened to by someone else, but that exclusion is fact-specific and does not turn an ordinary private phone call into something outside the definition just because a recording device happens to be nearby.

Sharing a Recorded Call Is a Separate Offence

Section 44 makes it an offence to publish a conversation obtained in contravention of s 43. Section 45 is a further, separate offence that applies specifically to a party who lawfully recorded the conversation and then communicates or publishes it, unless an exception applies: consent of the other parties, use in legal proceedings, or a disclosure reasonably necessary in the public interest, in the course of duty, or to protect the discloser's own interests. This is the most useful practical point on Queensland phone-call recording: being exempt from the recording offence under s 43(2) does not make sharing the call afterward automatically lawful.

Could a Recorded Call Be Used in Court?

Queensland has not adopted the uniform Evidence Act framework used in New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, the ACT and the Northern Territory. Admissibility of improperly or unlawfully obtained evidence in Queensland is instead assessed under the common-law discretion associated with Bunning v Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54, which weighs similar considerations to the statutory discretion elsewhere, including the seriousness of any impropriety and the cogency of the evidence. No recording can be described in advance as admissible; courts weigh admissibility under this discretion on the specific facts of each case.

The Federal Civil Tort

Publishing a recorded call can also engage the federal statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy, part of Schedule 2 to the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) and in force since 10 June 2025. It provides a civil action, without proof of damage, for a serious, intentional or reckless invasion of privacy, applying nationwide alongside the state rules above.

This article provides general legal information about phone-call recording law in Queensland. It is not legal advice and does not take into account your specific circumstances. For advice about a particular recording, consult a legal practitioner admitted in the relevant Australian state or territory.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it legal to record my own phone call in Queensland?

Recording a call you are a party to falls within the exemption in s 43(2) of the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld). This is general information about the statute, not an assessment of any specific recording.

Does federal law stop me recording my own phone call in Queensland?

Generally no. The federal interception offence in the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth) s 7 targets recording a call in transit over the network without the knowledge of the person making it, not a participant recording at the handset.

Can I record a call between two other people in Queensland if I'm not on it?

That is caught by s 43(1) of the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld) without the benefit of the s 43(2) exemption, which only applies to a party to the conversation.

Can I share a phone call recording I lawfully made in Queensland?

Not automatically. Publishing a recorded call is a separate offence under ss 44 and 45 of the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld), with its own limited exceptions, regardless of whether making the recording was lawful.

Will a secretly recorded phone call be allowed as evidence in a Queensland court?

No recording can be guaranteed admissible. Queensland has not adopted the uniform Evidence Act, so admissibility of improperly obtained evidence is assessed under the common-law discretion from Bunning v Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54, on the specific facts of each case.