FREE CONSULTATION
Speak to a Principal Lawyer
Charged with Perverting the Course of Justice? What You Need to Know
Perverting the course of justice is an offence under section 319 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). It carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment.
The offence is broad. It covers any act or omission done with the intention of obstructing, preventing, perverting, or defeating the course of justice. Asking a friend for a false alibi, pressuring a complainant to withdraw a statement, destroying evidence, or providing a forged character reference for a bail application can all lead to the charge.
A failed or clumsy attempt is still an offence, because the prosecution only needs to prove that you intended to pervert the course of justice.
The charge can be finalised in the Local Court or the District Court. NSW courts treat it seriously because it interferes with the justice system itself.
The Australian Legal Practice represents clients facing perverting the course of justice charges across Burwood, Sydney CBD, and Parramatta. Our lawyers are available 24/7, and the first consultation is free.
Call (02) 8084 9929 to arrange a free consultation with a principal lawyer.
What Is Perverting the Course of Justice?
Section 312 of the Crimes Act 1900 defines perverting the course of justice as:
“obstructing, preventing, perverting or defeating the course of justice or the administration of the law.”
Conduct that can result in a charge includes:
- Asking another person to provide a false alibi
- Encouraging someone to plead guilty to an offence they did not commit
- Pressuring or persuading a complainant to drop charges
- Fabricating or destroying evidence
- Forging documents or letters to support a bail application or sentencing
- Misleading a referee into providing a character reference for court
- Offering a bribe to a police officer, witness, juror, or judicial officer
Perverting the course of justice is distinct from several related public justice offences:
- False accusations (section 314): making a false accusation to police
- Hindering investigation (section 315): intentionally hindering the investigation of a serious indictable offence, the discovery of evidence, or the apprehension of an offender
- Threatening or intimidating victims or witnesses (section 315A): threatening or causing injury or detriment to influence a person not to report an indictable offence
- Concealing a serious indictable offence (section 316): failing to report information that might be of material assistance to police about a serious indictable offence, without a reasonable excuse
- Perjury (section 327): giving false evidence under oath or affirmation in a judicial proceeding
- False driver nomination (section 188 Road Transport Act 2013): falsely nominating another person as the driver for a traffic offence, which can be combined with a false statutory declaration under section 25 of the Oaths Act 1900
Perverting the Course of Justice Under Australian Law
Section 319 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) provides:
“A person who does any act, or makes any omission, intending in any way to pervert the course of justice, is liable to imprisonment for 14 years.”
Offence | Section | Maximum Penalty |
Perverting the course of justice | s 319 Crimes Act 1900 | 14 years imprisonment |
False accusations | s 314 Crimes Act 1900 | 7 years imprisonment |
Hindering investigation | s 315 Crimes Act 1900 | 7 years imprisonment |
Threatening or intimidating victims or witnesses | s 315A Crimes Act 1900 | 7 years imprisonment |
Concealing a serious indictable offence | s 316 Crimes Act 1900 | 2 years imprisonment, or 5 years where a benefit is involved |
Tampering with evidence | s 317 Crimes Act 1900 | 10 years imprisonment |
Perjury | s 327 Crimes Act 1900 | 10 years imprisonment |
Perjury with intent to procure a conviction or acquittal | s 328 Crimes Act 1900 | 14 years imprisonment |
False statutory declaration | s 25 Oaths Act 1900 | 5 years imprisonment |
False driver nomination | s 188 Road Transport Act 2013 | $11,000 fine |
Jurisdiction and court:
- Perverting the course of justice is a Table 1 offence under Schedule 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)
- The matter is dealt with in the Local Court unless either the prosecution or the accused elects to have it heard in the District Court
- In the District Court, a plea of not guilty is heard by a Judge and jury
What Must the Prosecution Prove?
To secure a conviction under section 319, the prosecution must prove each of the following elements beyond reasonable doubt:
- You did an act or made an omission
- You intended, in any way, to pervert the course of justice
If the prosecution cannot prove either element, the court must find you not guilty.
How these elements apply in practice:
- Intention is central: the prosecution must prove you acted with the purpose of interfering with the course of justice. A genuine mistake, or conduct with an innocent explanation, falls outside the offence
- Success is irrelevant: the offence is complete when the act is done with the required intention, even if the attempt failed or could never have worked
- Proceedings need not have started: following R v Rogerson [1992] HCA 25, conduct before court proceedings can be caught where you contemplated that proceedings were possible and intended to frustrate them
Penalties for Perverting the Course of Justice in NSW
Court | Maximum Penalty |
Local Court | 2 years imprisonment and/or 100 penalty units ($11,000) |
District Court | 14 years imprisonment |
Sentencing options available to the court:
- Section 10 dismissal (no conviction recorded)
- Conditional Release Order (CRO) with or without conviction
- Fine
- Community Correction Order (CCO)
- Intensive Correction Order (ICO), served in the community
- Full-time imprisonment
The NSW Judicial Commission’s Sentencing Bench Book records that these offences “strike at the very heart of the justice system and must be severely punished wherever detected.” It also states that “strongly deterrent sentences are required.”
Factors that influence the severity of the penalty:
- The seriousness of the proceedings the conduct was intended to affect
- Whether the conduct involved threats or bribes
- Whether the conduct was planned or spontaneous
- Whether the accused held a position of trust, such as a police officer
- Prior criminal history
- Genuine remorse and an early guilty plea, which attracts a discount of up to 25 per cent
A failed attempt carries less weight in mitigation than it would for other offences. The Sentencing Bench Book notes that an unsuccessful attempt to pervert the course of justice “is of far less significance than in the case of sentencing for an attempt to commit some other substantive offence.”
Non-custodial outcomes are possible. In one reported case, a Judge’s associate who misled a retired Judge into providing a character reference received an 18-month Community Correction Order with 300 hours of community service and a recorded conviction.
Other consequences of a conviction include:
- A criminal record that can affect employment and professional registration
- Immigration consequences for non-citizens under the character test in the Migration Act 1958
Possible Defences Against Perverting the Course of Justice
Several defences can result in a perverting the course of justice charge being dismissed or withdrawn.
- No intention: you did not intend to pervert the course of justice, for example because the conduct had an innocent explanation or resulted from a genuine mistake
- No contemplated proceedings: you were unaware that court proceedings existed or might occur
- Duress: you were forced to act by threats of serious harm from another person
- Necessity: the conduct was necessary to avoid an imminent and greater harm
- Mistaken identity: you were not the person who carried out the conduct
- Mental health: where a mental health or cognitive impairment was a relevant factor, an application under section 14 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) can result in a Local Court matter being dealt with by way of a treatment plan rather than a conviction
Every defence is assessed on the specific facts, including phone records, messages, recorded conversations, witness statements, and any admissions made during a police interview.
Your Options When Charged with Perverting the Course of Justice
Option | What It Means |
Negotiate with the prosecution | Where intention is contestable, representations can result in the charge being withdrawn or replaced with a less serious public justice offence |
Plead not guilty | Contest the charge at a defended hearing or trial, where the prosecution must prove you acted with the intention of perverting the course of justice beyond reasonable doubt |
Plead guilty and seek the best outcome | An early guilty plea attracts a sentencing discount of up to 25 per cent; character references and evidence of remorse can support a community-based sentence in place of full-time imprisonment |
Why Choose The Australian Legal Practice for Perverting the Course of Justice Charges
- Principal-level representation. You deal directly with an experienced senior lawyer
- 24/7 availability on (02) 8084 9929. Police can arrest or request an interview at any hour
- Three Sydney offices: Burwood, Sydney CBD, and Parramatta
- Free initial consultation so you can understand the charge and the realistic outcomes
- Fixed-fee arrangements available for matters finalised in the Local Court
- Experience testing the evidence of intention, the central element of the offence
- Advice on the original case the conduct related to, alongside the new charge
Call (02) 8084 9929 to arrange a free consultation with a principal lawyer.
ONLINE ENQUIRY
Make a booking to arrange a free consult today.
Call A Lawyer NOw
AVAILABLE 24/7
Frequently Asked Questions About Perverting the Course of Justice
Yes. Following R v Rogerson [1992] HCA 25, conduct during a police investigation can amount to perverting the course of justice where you contemplated that court proceedings were possible and intended to frustrate them.
Yes, it is still considered an offence if your attempt fails. Section 319 of the Act only requires an act or omission done with the intention of perverting the course of justice. The success of your attempt to pervert the course of justice will mainly have implications on sentencing.
It can be. If your false statement was made in an attempt to frustrate possible court proceedings, it can amount to perverting the course of justice. Depending on the facts, police may instead charge a related offence, such as making a false accusation under section 314 or hindering an investigation under section 315.
Falsely nominating another person as the driver is an offence under section 188 of the Road Transport Act 2013, with a maximum fine of $11,000. Where a false statutory declaration is made, a separate offence under section 25 of the Oaths Act 1900 applies, with a maximum of 5 years imprisonment.
Not necessarily. The courts treat these offences seriously and give significant weight to general deterrence, but non-custodial sentences, including Community Correction Orders and Intensive Correction Orders, are available. The outcome depends on the seriousness of the conduct and your personal circumstances.
Speak to a criminal defence lawyer today on (02) 8084 9929 or book a free consultation online.
