Home Security Cameras and CCTV Law in Tasmania

Tasmania is one of only three Australian jurisdictions with no general optical or video surveillance statute at all, alongside Queensland and the ACT. A security camera's video generally falls outside Tasmania's surveillance law, apart from the narrow Police Offences Act offences for recording someone in a private place or doing a private act; its audio does not, and many consumer cameras and doorbells can record sound, some by default, which is exactly why the microphone, not the lens, is where a Tasmanian homeowner is most likely to run into trouble.

Two Very Different Rules for One Camera

A modern security camera or video doorbell usually does two things at once: it records video, and it records audio. In Tasmania these are treated completely differently, because only one of them has a general state statute behind it. There is no Tasmanian equivalent to New South Wales' or South Australia's optical-surveillance provisions; video is simply not covered by a general surveillance offence in this state. Audio is a different story: the Listening Devices Act 1991 (Tas) applies in full to any device that captures a private conversation, camera or not.

Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses security camera and CCTV law in Tasmania under the Listening Devices Act 1991 (Tas) and the Police Offences Act 1935 (Tas). It does not address the equivalent rules in other Australian states or territories, several of which (New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia, South Australia, the Northern Territory) have a general optical-surveillance provision that Tasmania lacks; for the national picture, see CCTV and home security camera laws in Australia. For Tasmania's general recording rules, see Tasmania recording laws.

The Video: Largely Unregulated by State Recording Law

Because the Listening Devices Act 1991 covers only devices capable of recording or listening to a conversation, ordinary video of a driveway, yard, footpath or street is not caught by it at all, and there is no separate Tasmanian optical-surveillance Act to catch it instead. This is a genuinely unusual position by Australian standards. States such as New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory each have a dedicated optical-surveillance offence, generally built around a "private activity" test that restricts filming someone in a genuinely private setting even without audio. Tasmania, together with the ACT and Queensland, simply has no equivalent general offence.

That does not mean video is entirely unregulated. The Police Offences Act 1935 (Tas) ss.13A-13C address a narrower category of intrusive visual recording: observing or recording a person without consent where they are in a private place or engaged in a private act, or capturing their genital or anal region when covered only by underwear or bare. These provisions were inserted in 2007 and cover the core scenarios associated with voyeurism, upskirting and similar non-consensual image capture, but they are considerably narrower than a general optical-surveillance offence. Ordinary footage of a driveway, a front door, or a passer-by on a public footpath falls well outside them.

The Audio: Where Tasmania's Real CCTV Risk Sits

Section 5 of the Listening Devices Act 1991 applies the "private conversation" test to whatever a device with a microphone records, entirely independent of whether the video from the same device is regulated at all. A hushed conversation on an otherwise empty footpath outside your front door, captured by your doorbell's microphone, can still be a private conversation under the Act, even though filming the same footpath on video raises no state-law issue whatsoever. Homeowners typically think carefully about where the lens points and rarely consider that the microphone's practical range extends well beyond the camera's field of view, potentially picking up a neighbour's private phone call carried on a footpath, or a visitor's exchange at the front gate.

Tasmania's position is, if anything, less forgiving here than most other states. Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and the Northern Territory each define "private conversation" with an explicit exclusion for circumstances where a party "ought reasonably to expect" to be overheard, which gives some comfort that a loud, obviously public exchange falls outside the Act. Tasmania's section 3 definition has no equivalent express exclusion, and neither does the ACT's. In most ordinary outdoor settings the practical outcome will likely be similar, because a genuinely public, loudly conducted exchange will rarely "reasonably indicate" a desire for privacy either way, but a fact pattern that would clearly fall outside the Act elsewhere cannot be assumed to fall outside it in Tasmania without checking the actual circumstances.

Section 5(2)(d) says the prohibition does not apply to "the unintentional hearing of a private conversation by means of a listening device". Whether that covers a camera you deliberately leave recording audio around the clock has not been settled by the courts, so it is unsafe to rely on it. Even where it applies, sections 9 and 11 still restrict knowingly sharing a conversation heard that way, or knowingly keeping a record of it. The most practical response is to disable audio recording on outward-facing cameras and doorbells unless there is a specific reason to keep it enabled, or to keep the microphone's practical range within your own boundary.

Neighbour-Facing Cameras

Because there is no state optical-surveillance offence, pointing a camera's lens at a shared boundary, driveway or yard does not by itself raise a Tasmanian state-law problem the way it might in a state with a general optical-surveillance offence, such as Victoria, Western Australia or the Northern Territory (each built around a private-activity test). The Police Offences Act's narrower provisions become relevant if the camera observes or records someone, without consent, in a private place where a reasonable person would expect privacy (for example, a view into the inside of a neighbour's home), or is used for the purpose of recording a private act or a person's genital or anal region. A camera used as part of a campaign to frighten or intimidate a neighbour can also form part of the stalking offence in section 192 of the Criminal Code (Tas), which includes keeping a person under surveillance. If a dispute arises, talking to the neighbour directly and checking local council requirements is usually the simplest path, since the legal exposure here sits mainly with the audio, not the picture.

Publishing Security Camera Footage

Recording footage lawfully does not automatically mean you can publish or share it, at least where audio of a private conversation is involved. Section 9 of the Listening Devices Act 1991 restricts sharing a private conversation captured unlawfully or heard unintentionally by a device, and section 10 restricts a party to the conversation sharing their own recording of it, even a lawful one, subject to exceptions. This applies to footage with audio just as it does to a standalone recording. Sharing footage of a break-in with police is generally uncontroversial; posting footage more broadly, in a way that identifies a person and imputes wrongdoing, carries its own risk under the Act's publication provisions and can separately raise defamation exposure.

The Privacy Act and the New Statutory Tort

The federal Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) generally does not reach an individual operating a security camera in a purely personal, non-business capacity. That gap is now partly filled by the federal statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy, in force under Schedule 2 to the Privacy Act since 10 June 2025. Because the tort applies to any individual, not only organisations regulated by the Privacy Act, a domestic security camera that captures a genuinely private moment, whether through its lens or its microphone, could expose the camera's owner to a civil claim as well as potential criminal liability under the Listening Devices Act or the Police Offences Act. The tort requires the invasion to be intentional or reckless and serious; this article does not predict how a court would assess any specific camera setup.

Disclaimer: This article presents general legal information about security camera and CCTV law in Tasmania. It does not constitute legal advice. The information covers the Listening Devices Act 1991 (Tas), the Police Offences Act 1935 (Tas) and applicable Commonwealth legislation as in force as of 2026-10-26. Laws can change. If you have a specific legal situation, consult a legal practitioner admitted in Tasmania or the relevant Australian state or territory.

For Tasmania's general consent rules, see Tasmania recording laws. For recording conversations at work in Tasmania, see workplace recording in Tasmania. For recording phone calls in Tasmania, see phone call recording in Tasmania. For the national picture on CCTV and home security cameras, see CCTV and home security camera laws in Australia.

---

Last updated: 2026-10-26. Statutes cited reflect their in-force versions as of 2026-10-26.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it legal to have a security camera pointed at my driveway in Tasmania?

Yes, generally, from a state recording-law perspective. Tasmania has no general optical-surveillance statute, so ordinary video of your own driveway, front door or yard is not restricted by the Listening Devices Act 1991 (Tas) at all. The camera's microphone is a separate question, covered below.

Can my doorbell camera legally record audio in Tasmania?

Only if the audio does not capture a private conversation without consent or a qualifying basis. Section 5 of the Listening Devices Act 1991 (Tas) applies to a doorbell's microphone the same way it applies to any other listening device, and unlike Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and the Northern Territory, Tasmania's definition of private conversation has no explicit exclusion for circumstances where a party ought reasonably to expect to be overheard, making outdoor audio a genuine risk area.

Can I point a security camera at my neighbour's yard in Tasmania?

There is no state optical-surveillance offence restricting this in Tasmania, unlike states such as Victoria, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. The narrower Police Offences Act 1935 (Tas) ss.13A-13C apply if the camera observes or records someone without consent in a private place where a reasonable person would expect privacy, such as a view into the inside of a neighbour's home, or is used for the purpose of recording a private act or a person's genital or anal region, not ordinary yard or boundary footage.

Does the Privacy Act cover my home CCTV system in Tasmania?

Generally not directly. The federal Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) and the Australian Privacy Principles are directed at organisations, not individuals monitoring their own home in a personal capacity. Since 10 June 2025, the new federal statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy applies to individuals as well, and can potentially apply to a domestic camera that captures a genuinely private moment.

What is the penalty for an unlawful security camera recording in Tasmania?

It depends which provision applies. Unlawfully recording audio of a private conversation under section 5 of the Listening Devices Act 1991 (Tas) carries up to 40 penalty units (approximately $8,520 at the 2026-27 rate), two years imprisonment, or both, for an individual. A voyeurism-type visual offence under Police Offences Act 1935 (Tas) s.13A carries up to 50 penalty units, 12 months imprisonment, or both.