Summary Offences and Penalties in SA
We can help you if you have been charged with offences under the Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA).
Summary Offences SA
Adelaide criminal lawyers with a proven track record of securing charge withdrawals, acquittals and without conviction orders for charges under the Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA).
What is a Summary Offence?
Summary offences are dealt with in the Magistrates Court and typically attract lower maximum penalties than indictable crimes. However, the consequences (employment, visas, reputation, licensing) can be just as serious.
Our focus is to end the matter early (withdrawal/downgrade) or avoid a conviction where appropriate via section 97 discharge without conviction or section 24 penalty without conviction.
Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation or call (08) 7094 2021 to speak with a criminal lawyer specialising in summary offences
We Fight All Summary Offences
| Offence | Section | Penalty (Max) | Key Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disorderly or Offensive Conduct / Language | s 7 | $1,250 or 3 months | Public place or police station; includes fighting and offensive language. |
| Hindering Police | s 6 | $2,500 or 6 months | Hinder/obstruct/interrupt police in execution of duty; includes false details. |
| Violent Disorder | s 6A | $10,000 or 2 years | 3+ persons use/threaten unlawful violence; objective “reasonable firmness” test. |
| Being on Premises for an Unlawful Purpose | s 17 | $1,250 or 3 months | Found on premises without lawful excuse with intent to commit an offence. |
| Trespassers on Premises | s 17A | $2,500 or 6 months | Enter/remain without consent; higher treatment for primary production premises. |
| Trespassers at Private Parties | s 17AB | $1,250 or 3 months | Fail/refuse to leave private party when directed. |
| Misuse of a Motor Vehicle on Private Land | s 17AA | $2,500 | Burnouts, race/speed trials etc off-road; court must order compensation if damage. |
| Loitering | s 18 | $1,250 or 3 months | Police may require explanation; often charged with trespass/public order counts. |
| Offensive Weapons & Dangerous Articles | s 21C | (1) $2,500/6 mths; (2) $7,500/18 mths; (3) $10,000/2 yrs; (6) $1,250/3 mths; (7) $10,000/2 yrs | Carrying/dealing/using/visible carry/unsafe possession. s 21C(7) (2025) covers visible carry in schools, places of worship & public places. |
| Knives in Education Facilities, Places of Worship & Public Places | s 21E | First: $2,500 or 6 months; Subsequent: $5,000 or 12 months | Defences include reasonable excuse; broad “public place” coverage. |
| Unlawful Selling or Marketing of Knives | s 21D | Up to $10,000 or 6 months | Restrictions on advertising/marketing knives; tightened by 2024–25 reforms. |
| Prohibited Weapons | s 21F | Up to $10,000 or 2 years (commonly) | Schedules/regulations define prohibited weapons (e.g., machetes, swords under reforms). |
| Distribution of Invasive Image | s 26C | $10,000 or 2 years | “Revenge porn” / non-consensual sharing; ancillary orders may apply. |
| Indecent Filming | s 26D | $10,000 or 2 years | Filming a person’s private acts/parts without consent; aggravated variants exist. |
| Threat to Distribute Invasive/Indecent Image | s 26DA | $10,000 or 2 years | Threats to share intimate/invasive imagery; overlaps with improper demand offences. |
| Unlawful Possession of Personal Property | s 41 | $10,000 or 2 years | Reverse onus “honest possession” defence; “reasonably suspected” standard. |
| Unlawful Operation of Computer System | s 44 | $10,000 or 2 years | Operate a computer system without authority; often charged with data offences. |
| Using Vehicles or Animals Without Consent | s 45 | $2,500 or 6 months | Unauthorised use without intent to permanently deprive. |
| Indecent Behaviour / Gross Indecency | s 23 | $1,250 or 3 months (higher where specified) | Public indecency; specific facts determine charge/penalty within s 23. |
| Urinating in a Public Place | s 24 | Fine (typically expiable) | Context/location matters (e.g., near schools/venues). |
| Soliciting | s 25 | Fines | Public solicitation; related provisions for procurement/living on earnings (ss 25A–26). |
| Obstruction of Public Places | s 58 | $50,000 or 3 months | Penalty increased by 2023 amendments; intentional/reckless obstruction covered. |
| Sale of Drug Paraphernalia | s 9B | Up to $10,000 or 2 years | Prohibits sale/supply of prescribed “drug paraphernalia” items. |
Summary offences are deceptively broad and include a variety of offences from possessing unauthorised weapons, urinating in public, disorderly behaviour or using offensive language, to throwing missiles and even obscure offences such as disturbing farm animals or dog theft.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Summary Offences Act 1953?
Prior to 10 May 1985, it was known as the Police Offences Act. The Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA) is distinct from the Summary Procedure Act and makes provision for offences against public order and for powers of police officers in relation to the investigation of offences and more.
What is a public venue?
A public venue is a place where members of the public gather for entertainment or events or activities of any kind regardless of whether money was paid, or if admission is restricted to members of a club or particular class of persons, except churches or places of worship.
What is a public place?
Section 62 of the Evidence Act 1929 (SA) provides for proof of a public place in certain cases. The case law has provided that a fenced private road by trespassers on limited occasions does not make it a public place, but could be if there is evidence of its use by members of the public.
A theatre can be a public place even though some sections of the public are excluded from it: A-G v Huber; Ex parte Daniels (1971) 2 SASR 142 . Unfenced privately owned land to which the public has free access was held to be a public place in Roberts v O’Sullivan [1950] SASR 245.
An area which is normally a public place does not cease to be one while the public are temporarily denied access to it: Hughes v Fingleton (1977) 17 SASR 433.
What is an offensive weapon?
Offensive weapons under the Summary Offences Act 1953 are different to those under the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1931 (SA). The prosecution must prove that the defendant carried either a thing which was not in a common use for any purpose other than as a weapon or an instrument which has a normal use other than as a weapon, but on the occasion charged it was intended by the defendant to be a weapon of attack Coleman v Zanker (1991) 58 SASR 7 at 12.
An imitation pistol which was a cigarette lighter could be an offensive weapon where it was used offensively by the defendant: Sandaev v Forster (1983) 35 SASR 38 . The intention to use the object in an offensive manner need only be proved at the time of the commission of the offence and not earlier: R v RJS (1993) 69 A Crim R 163.
Not all knives are necessarily offensive weapons: Freundt v Hayes (1992) 59 A Crim R 430 at 437, but to the contrary is Darling v Police (2003) 228 LSJS 59; [2003] SASC 179; BC200303201 (Duggan J) which held all knives were offensive weapons without needing any proof of the purpose for which they were being carried.
In Verdiglione v Police [2007] SASC 349; BC200708463 (Kelly J): 28 September 2007, in holding that a baseball bat was an offensive weapon without proof of the purpose for which it was carried.
What is a dangerous article?
A pistol crossbow was held to be a dangerous article in Montgomery v SA Police (1994) 175 LSJS 419. The words written on a container do not prove the nature of its contents, but on evidence it was held that it could be inferred that its contents did constitute a dangerous article: Cooke v SA Police (2000) 211 LSJS 9; [2000] SASC 343.
A Ka-Bar knife is a knife designed or adapted for hand to hand fighting, and thus is a fighting knife for the purpose of para 7 of Sch 2 of those Regulations: Yuen v Police [2012] SASC 149.
What is trespassing?
Trespassing is an entry without right or permission by a person onto the land of another, or, if any right to enter is limited in its scope, an entry which is unrelated to the right: Barker v R (1983) 153 CLR 338 at 341–2; 47 ALR 1; 57 ALJR 426.
The offence requires a guilty intention that the defendant either knows they are trespassing they enter or while they are on the land, but no prior request to leave need be proved: Semple v Mant (1985) 39 SASR 282 . The initial trespass is not an offence under s 17A, only the refusal to leave and any subsequent entry, and there cannot be a claim of right defence to a re-entry where the defendant knew that he or she had no right to re-enter: Police v Slobodian (2008) 254 LSJS 117; [2008] SASC 69.
What is loitering?
To loiter means to tarry or hang about even if the person has a lawful reason to be there: Samuels v Stokes (1973) 130 CLR 490; 2 ALR 269. A legal, contractual, moral or social duty of gravity, and a real necessity, may justify a person remaining after a direction to cease loitering: Power v Huffa (1976) 14 SASR 337; Walker v Hayes (1986) 44 SASR 250;
A victim of a crime seeking to report it to a police officer, and refusing to move on when requested to do so, does not have a sufficient reason not to move on, and so is offending against s 18: Cross v Police [2012] SASC 108.
The test is objective. A person who is moving cannot be loitering: Rice v Daire (1982) 30 SASR 560. There can be a defence of impossibility to comply with the direction where the defendant is physically unable to move: Starri v SA Police (1995) 182 LSJS 273; 80 A Crim R 197.
What is indecent language?
Language is indecent if it is highly offensive to recognised standards of common propriety, although not only to people who are easily shocked: Robertson v Samuels (1973) 4 SASR 465. It is the current contemporary standards of the community which are to be applied, and thus language previously considered indecent may no longer be so: Romeyko v Samuels (1972) 2 SASR 529. No evidence can be called on what is considered indecent: Prowse v Bartlett (1972) 3 SASR 472. Whether language is indecent is a question of fact and is to be assessed against the background circumstances.
What is soliciting?
“Soliciting” involves a personal approach for the purpose of, or which is accompanied by, or which constitutes or conveys, an offer that some form of sexual activity will be engaged in by the person making the approach in return for monetary gain: Coleman v DPP (2000) 49 NSWLR 371.
Soliciting must amount to an invitation to other persons going about their business to avail themselves of the services offered: Fingleton v Bryson (1980) 26 SASR 208. It requires the physical presence of the offender in the act of invitation, and so a written advertisement is not sufficient: Weisz v Monahan [1962] 1 All ER 664 ; Burge v DPP [1962] 1 All ER 666 at 667.
The offender need not be in a public place provided that the solicitation is projected into a public place: Behrendt v Burridge [1976] 3 All ER 285.
A mere offering of the services is sufficient without any further element of pestering, importuning or flaunting: Jitjarden v Thompson (1995) 85 A Crim R 24.
How to Beat a Summary Offence
Every summary offence can be challenged on various grounds. These may include:
- Do not participate in a police interview.
- Ask to speak with a lawyer.
- Avoid making any admissions.
- Decline any invitation to attend a police station..
Serving All of Adelaide & Beyond
Our experienced criminal lawyers regularly appear in the following courts
South Australian Magistrates Courts We Attend
We appear in every metropolitan and regional Magistrates’ Court listed below. Select a location for directions, parking advice and our recent case results.
We act quickly, provide fixed fees, and appear in every South Australian Court including the Magistrates Court, District Court and Supreme Court.
Need Help With a Summary Offence?
If you have been charged with a summary offence in SA, speak to a criminal lawyer who understands how the courts treat these matters.
- Call now (08) 7094 2021 or book your free case review online.
- Understand non-conviction outcomes: Section 24 Sentencing Act guide.
- Read our recent case studies: Talon Legal cases won.
Related Insights
How Can I Avoid a Conviction Being Recorded?
Penalty Without Conviction In South Australia, courts have discretion to impose a penalty or sentence without recording a conviction pursuant to Section 24 of the Sentencing…
Aggravated Assault Charge Withdrawn | Case Study
Aggravated Assault Charge Withdrawn Aggravated assault charges withdrawn by the Prosecution after forensic review of the evidence and negotiations. Background Our client was charged with…
Assault Charge Against Security Guard Withdrawn | Case Study
Assault Charge Dropped A security guard was charged with assault after being attacked by a drunk patron. Talon Legal secured an early charge withdrawal and…
Section 97 Good Behaviour Bond Without Conviction
Without Conviction Good Behaviour Bonds Explained Learn how to avoid a recorded conviction and criminal record with a Section 97 Good Behaviour Bond without conviction…
Without Conviction for Assault Cause Harm | Case Study
No Conviction for Assault Cause Harm A contested assault resolved without conviction after raising defensive context and targeted submissions under section 24 of the Sentencing Act….
No Conviction For Driving Disqualified
No Conviction for Driving Disqualified No conviction recorded for driving disqualified in the Magistrates Court after persuading the Court of good reasons under section 97…