NSW Police Bail Checks: The Law Enforcement Conduct Commission (LECC) has called for urgent changes to police bail checks. Its April 2025 report recommends police stop entering homes without a court order.
O'Brien Criminal & Civil Solicitors backed the call. We shared the story of one family's ordeal during one of these NSW Police Bail checks.
What is the LECC's report on NSW Police Bail about?
The LECC's final report on Bail Compliance Checks in NSW delivers a strong message: police must stop entering private property without proper legal authority. The Commission found that bail checks involving home visits should only happen when a court imposes an enforcement condition under section 30 of the Bail Act.
Furthermore, the report criticised the police practice of relying on "implied licence" to justify uninvited visits. The report said this approach is legally uncertain, easily revoked by the occupier, and not suitable for routine or repeated checks. It also warned that current police conduct may be inconsistent with the rights of people on bail and those they live with, especially in vulnerable communities.
NSW Police Bail Checks: Case Summary
For the report, O'Brien Criminal & Civil Solicitors submitted a case study and our findings. Our firm acted for a family repeatedly visited by NSW police.
Dwayne, a 15-year-old Indigenous boy, was on bail with a curfew. However, no court had ordered police to check his bail. Still, officers came seven times in just over a month. They climbed locked gates, knocked loudly, and entered the home. Additionally, officers even shone torches on Albert while he slept.
The family revoked any implied permission to enter. However, police officers still came back three more times.
We stepped in and helped the family commence proceedings against the NSW Police, seeking compensation on the basis of trespass and assault.
LECC's Key Findings on NSW Police Bail:
- Police must get court orders before checking bail at someone's home.
- Relying on "implied licence" is unclear, weak, and easily revoked.
- Police should update their procedures to follow the law.
Hear from our lawyers on NSW police bail checks and our Case Study
Q: What exactly happened to Dwayne and his
family?
Megan Kirk, Solicitor:
"Dwayne* was just 15, on bail with a curfew but no court order allowing police checks. That didn't stop officers from coming, seven times in just over a month.
They scaled a locked gate, knocked loudly, shone torches into windows, and on one occasion, entered the house and shone a light on Dwayne while he was asleep and unclothed. It was deeply invasive and entirely avoidable."
Q: On what grounds did police claim they could do
this?
Peter O'Brien, Principal Solicitor:
"They claimed they had what's called an 'implied licence', a legal concept that usually allows someone to approach your front door for a legitimate reason. But this isn't about delivering the mail. Climbing gates and entering bedrooms goes well beyond that. The law doesn't grant police a blank cheque to bypass privacy and dignity."
The impact on the family
Q: Did the family make it clear the police weren't
welcome?
Patrick Latham, Solicitor:
"They did, unequivocally. Stella*, Dwayne's mother, formally revoked any implied permission through a letter from Legal Aid. She told police not to come back. Yet they did—three more times. At that point, it wasn't just intrusive. It was unlawful. That's why we're pursuing a claim for trespass and assault."
Q: How does the LECC report support your clients'
case?
Megan Kirk, Solicitor:
"It's a crucial piece of the puzzle. The LECC report was very clear: police should not be entering homes for bail checks unless the court has ordered it. That's what section 30 of the Bail Act is for. The report confirms what we've argued all along, that these kinds of police actions lack clear legal backing and risk serious breaches of rights, especially when directed at young people or marginalised communities."
What does this case mean?
Q: Why is this case particularly concerning for
Indigenous families?
Peter O'Brien, Principal
Solicitor:
"Indigenous communities are already over-policed. When police show up unannounced in the middle of the night, it compounds fear and mistrust. Albert's case isn't just about an individual breach, it reflects a wider pattern where Aboriginal families face harsher and more frequent interventions from the state."
Q: What kind of trauma can these checks
cause?
Megan Kirk, Solicitor:
"It's not just a knock at the door. When police burst in, shine lights, or demand someone be woken up from sleep, especially a young person, it can leave lasting psychological damage. Our clients describe stress, sleep disruption, and a constant fear of further intrusion. It takes a serious emotional toll."
Q: Could these bail checks have been done
lawfully?
Patrick Latham, Solicitor:
"Yes, easily. If police genuinely believed checks were needed, they could've asked the court for an enforcement condition. That's what the Bail Act sets out. But they didn't. They chose a shortcut that stripped away legal safeguards."
Q: What changes are you hoping to see after the LECC
report?
Peter O'Brien, Principal
Solicitor:
"We want the NSW Police Force to rewrite their procedures so officers can't rely on this flimsy 'implied licence' excuse. Bail enforcement must go through the courts. It's about respecting people's homes, their privacy, and the rule of law."
Q: What message does this send to other families in
similar situations?
Megan Kirk, Solicitor:
"It tells families they're not alone, and they can challenge this. What happened to Dwayne and his family was wrong, but bringing their story forward can help protect others. These cases matter because they shine a light on practices that have gone unchecked for too long."
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
