Extreme Speed SA: Section 19ADA Charges, Penalties and Licence Loss
Extreme speed charges in South Australia
Driving 55 km/h or more over a limit of 60 km/h or less, or 80 km/h or more over a higher limit, is extreme speed under section 19ADA. It carries up to 3 years imprisonment, or 5 years if aggravated, and every conviction brings a licence disqualification of at least 2 years that no court can reduce. Talon Legal defends extreme speed charges in Magistrates Courts across South Australia. Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation or call (08) 7094 2021.
Extreme speed key facts
| Issue | Position in South Australia |
|---|---|
| Governing law | Section 19ADA of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA), in force since 16 December 2021; current version on the South Australian register as at 7 November 2026. |
| The offence | Driving a motor vehicle at 55 km/h or more over a limit of 60 km/h or less, or 80 km/h or more over a higher limit (section 19ADA(1), (2)). For example, 115 km/h in a 60 zone or 190 km/h in a 110 zone. |
| Maximum penalty | Imprisonment for 3 years for a basic offence and 5 years for an aggravated offence. No fine is prescribed (section 19ADA(1)). |
| Licence | Disqualification of at least 2 years for a first basic offence, and at least 5 years for a first aggravated or any subsequent offence. It cannot be reduced, and it cancels the licence (section 19ADA(5)). |
| Police notice | Police can disqualify or suspend on the spot for up to 12 months. A court can lift the notice only on exceptional circumstances and no substantial risk to the public (section 19AF). |
| Classification | A minor indictable offence (section 5(3)(a)(ii) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1921 (SA)). It is not dealt with by expiation notice. |
| Demerit points | None are prescribed for extreme speed (Motor Vehicles Regulations 2025, Schedule 4). |
| The vehicle | Police can clamp or impound the car for 28 days, and on conviction the court must order forfeiture on the prosecution's application unless it declines on a section 13(1) ground. |
| First step | Same-day free 30-minute consultation. Call (08) 7094 2021. |
Charged with extreme speed? What section 19ADA covers
Section 19ADA of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) makes it an offence to drive a motor vehicle at an extreme speed. This guide sets out extreme speed SA law: the thresholds, the penalties and aggravating circumstances, the mandatory disqualification, the immediate police notice, how speed is proved, and what happens to the car. It states the law current to 7 November 2026.
Extreme speed sits at the top of the speeding ladder on our Speeding Offences SA page. One step below it is excessive speed, 45 km/h or more over the limit, under section 45A of the Road Traffic Act. Speed alone can also found a charge of driving at a speed dangerous under section 46, one of the alternative verdicts on an extreme speed charge.
Free Consultation. An immediate police notice starts to run when it is given. Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation or call (08) 7094 2021.
On this page
- What counts as extreme speed?
- What is the penalty for extreme speed in SA?
- When is extreme speed aggravated?
- How long is the licence disqualification?
- Can police disqualify a driver on the spot?
- Can the police notice be lifted early?
- How do police prove the speed and the driver?
- Can the charge be reduced to dangerous driving?
- What if someone is hurt?
- Can police take the car?
- Are there demerit points or a levy?
- How similar cases tend to play out
- How we defend an extreme speed charge
- Extreme speed case law
- Frequently asked questions
What counts as extreme speed?
Exceeding the relevant speed limit by 55 km/h or more where the limit is 60 km/h or less, or by 80 km/h or more where the limit is higher (section 19ADA(2)).
The relevant speed limit is one that applies to the driver under the Road Traffic Act 1961 (SA), other than section 82 or 83, or under the Motor Vehicles Act 1959 (SA) (section 19ADA(10)). In practice that takes in sign-posted limits and the default limits in the Australian Road Rules, which are made under the Road Traffic Act (section 80). The 25 km/h limits for passing a stopped school bus (section 82) and in an emergency service speed zone (section 83) do not count.
The table applies both speed offences to common limits. The figures are arithmetic on section 45A(1) and section 19ADA(2).
| Speed limit | Excessive speed (section 45A) from | Extreme speed (section 19ADA) from |
|---|---|---|
| 40 km/h | 85 km/h | 95 km/h |
| 50 km/h | 95 km/h | 105 km/h |
| 60 km/h | 105 km/h | 115 km/h |
| 70 km/h | 115 km/h | 150 km/h |
| 80 km/h | 125 km/h | 160 km/h |
| 90 km/h | 135 km/h | 170 km/h |
| 100 km/h | 145 km/h | 180 km/h |
| 110 km/h | 155 km/h | 190 km/h |
The step above 60 km/h is large. On a 60 km/h road, 115 km/h is extreme speed. On a 70 km/h road the line is 150 km/h.
Every extreme speed is also at least 45 km/h over the limit, so the same driving is excessive speed as well.
Emergency vehicle drivers are exempt if they are taking reasonable care, it is reasonable that the section should not apply, and a moving vehicle is showing a blue or red flashing light or sounding an alarm (section 19ADA(3)). A police vehicle can be excused from the light and alarm where that is reasonable (section 19ADA(4)). The emergency workers covered are listed in regulation 5(1) of the Criminal Law Consolidation (General) Regulations 2021.
What is the penalty for extreme speed in SA?
Imprisonment for up to 3 years for a basic offence and 5 years for an aggravated offence (section 19ADA(1)). The section prescribes no fine.
| Basic offence | Aggravated offence | |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum imprisonment | 3 years | 5 years |
| Minimum disqualification, first offence | 2 years | 5 years |
| Minimum disqualification, subsequent offence | 5 years | 5 years |
Extreme speed is a minor indictable offence, because its maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed 5 years (section 5(3)(a)(ii) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1921 (SA)). No expiation fee is fixed for it, so every charge goes to court. The time limits in section 52 of that Act apply only to summary offences, so the 6 month limit that governs most speeding prosecutions does not apply.
The Supreme Court has said that grossly excessive speed endangers the public. In Police v Pimlott [2011] SASC 214, a dangerous driving case at 176 km/h, it said such speed calls for deterrence ([13]), and it increased the 12 month minimum disqualification the magistrate had imposed to 18 months ([15], [20] to [21]).
When is extreme speed aggravated?
When the offence caused harm to a person, or the driver committed it in a circumstance listed in section 5AA(1d)(b) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act. The maximum then rises from 3 to 5 years, and the minimum disqualification for a first offence from 2 to 5 years.
| Circumstance | Section |
|---|---|
| The offence caused harm to a person | 5AA(1d)(a) |
| A stolen vehicle, or one used without the owner's consent, knowing of that or reckless as to it | 5AA(1d)(b)(i) |
| Attempting to escape pursuit by a police officer | 5AA(1d)(b)(ii) |
| Knowing there were one or more passengers in or on the vehicle | 5AA(1d)(b)(iii) |
| Holding a learner's permit, a provisional or probationary licence, or an interstate learner's permit or provisional licence | 5AA(1d)(b)(iv) |
| Not holding a licence or permit for the class of vehicle | 5AA(1d)(b)(v) |
| Driving knowing of a disqualification, or of a suspension by notice under the Road Traffic Act | 5AA(1d)(b)(vi) |
| A blood alcohol concentration of .08 grams or more in 100 millilitres of blood | 5AA(1d)(b)(vii) |
| Driving in contravention of section 47 or 47BA of the Road Traffic Act (drink or drug driving) | 5AA(1d)(b)(viii) |
A person is taken to know a fact if, knowing it was possible, they were reckless as to whether it was true (section 5AA(2)). The circumstances of aggravation must be stated in the instrument of charge (section 5AA(3)).
A single passenger is enough, if the driver knew the passenger was there. For a P-plater driving a vehicle the licence covers, extreme speed is an aggravated offence from the start.
How long is the licence disqualification?
At least 2 years for a first basic offence, and at least 5 years for a first aggravated offence or any subsequent offence (section 19ADA(5)(a)). These are minimums, and the court can order more. The disqualification cannot be reduced or mitigated, or replaced with another penalty (section 19ADA(5)(b)), and it cancels any licence the person holds (section 19ADA(5)(c)).
These count as previous offences (section 19ADA(7)):
- a conviction for excessive speed under section 45A, or reckless or dangerous driving under section 46, of the Road Traffic Act, for an offence committed in the 5 years before the extreme speed offence;
- a conviction at any time for extreme speed, for another offence in Part 3 Division 6 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act (the serious vehicle and vessel offences, which include police pursuit under section 19AC), or for an offence against a corresponding previous enactment.
Section 19ADA(7) refers only to convictions. Unlike the excessive speed provision (section 45A(4)), it does not mention expiated offences.
Because the disqualification cannot be reduced, the main licence question is usually the charge itself.
Can police disqualify a driver on the spot?
Yes. An officer who reasonably believes a person has committed extreme speed may give a notice of immediate licence disqualification or suspension (section 19AF(1)(b)). It disqualifies an unlicensed person and suspends a licence holder’s licence (section 19AF(2)).
The notice takes effect when it is given (section 19AF(17)(a)) and ends at the first of these (section 19AF(17)(b)(ii)):
- the date in a court order under section 19AF(6);
- a determination that the person should not be charged, of which written notice must be given (section 19AF(10));
- the end of the proceedings, by a court’s decision or by withdrawal or discontinuance;
- 12 months after it started.
Driving during the notice is an offence under section 91(5a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, with a maximum of 12 months imprisonment for a first offence and 3 years for a subsequent offence.
On conviction, the court must take the notice period into account. It may order that its disqualification be taken to have started when the notice started, but the period cannot be less than the mandatory minimum, and the licence is taken to be cancelled from the day of the order (section 19AF(13)).
The Commissioner of Police may withdraw a notice given in error, a defective notice, or one that should not have been given for other proper cause. A fresh extreme speed notice to the same person is then reduced by the time the withdrawn notice ran (section 19AF(13a) to (13d)).
Can the police notice be lifted early?
Yes, if a two-part test is met. A court may end the disqualification or suspension on a date it specifies, if it is satisfied on evidence given on oath by or on behalf of the person that:
- exceptional circumstances exist in relation to the person or the alleged offence, such that it is appropriate in all the circumstances to make the order; and
- the person does not pose a substantial risk to other members of the public if the order is made (section 19AF(6)).
The Crown is entitled to be heard (section 19AF(7)). It may lead evidence of the applicant’s previous offences relating to the use of a motor vehicle, whether found guilty or expiated, and evidence of the alleged offence (section 19AF(8)).
The Magistrates Court application under section 47IAB of the Road Traffic Act, explained on the immediate loss of licence appeal page, does not cover section 19AF notices.
How do police prove the speed and the driver?
With evidence of the speed and of who was driving. Section 19ADA(9) applies sections 22, 53B(5), 79B(10) and 175 of the Road Traffic Act to extreme speed. Two of them do most of the work:
- section 79B(10): a camera photograph is admitted if the device was operated and tested as the Act and regulations require, and an inspector’s certificate that those requirements were met is proof unless the contrary is proved;
- section 175(3): a certificate that a speed measuring device was tested and shown accurate is proof of its accuracy for a set period, unless the contrary is proved.
| Device | The certificate covers | Section |
|---|---|---|
| Fixed speed camera | The day of the test and the following 1 year | 175(3)(ba) |
| Mobile speed camera | The day of the test and the following day | 175(3)(baaa) |
| Speed analyser that is not a camera, such as a hand-held laser or radar | The day of the test and the following 1 year | 175(3)(baa) |
| Speedometer | The 3 months before and the 3 months after the test | 175(3)(b) |
Section 175(3) was amended with effect from 6 November 2025 and 1 January 2026, so for an older offence the wording in force on the offence date applies.
Certificates can be answered. In Police v Shah [2025] SASC 47, which arose from an extreme speed prosecution, a fixed camera recorded 123 km/h in a 60 km/h zone ([5]). The magistrate acquitted on extreme speed and on the alternative dangerous driving charge, and police appealed only the dangerous driving acquittal ([3]). The certificate said the camera was set to operate under one testing regulation, but the police testing record tendered by the defence referred to another ([8], [12] to [13]). The Supreme Court found that record was evidence to the contrary on the balance of probabilities, without the defence calling the officers who did the testing ([45], [48]), and dismissed the appeal.
The prosecution must also prove that a measuring device was in proper order and properly operated (Zefi v Commissioner of Police [2024] SASC 42 at [48]). In Zefi, an excessive speed conviction based on a laser reading was quashed and an acquittal entered, because there was no evidence of how the device was operated ([69] to [72]).
In Police v Butcher [2016] SASC 130, the driver proved that the test done on a laser gun could not show the accuracy stated in its certificate, and that was enough: he did not have to prove the gun was inaccurate ([18] to [20]).
Not every flaw helps. In Police v Bulgin [2010] SASC 143, the Court said a departure from operating instructions does not of itself make a reading unreliable ([44] to [45]), and that a defendant must do more than point to some evidence to the contrary to displace the presumption ([46]), noting an earlier view that the onus is only evidential ([47]). The contesting a speeding fine guide sets out both views.
Identity is a separate question. The owner offence in section 79B(2), under which the owner of a camera-detected vehicle is guilty unless the owner nominates the driver or proves another exception, is not among the provisions section 19ADA(9) applies, so an owner is not guilty of extreme speed merely as owner. Section 175 is applied, and under section 175(1)(i) an allegation in the information that a specified person was the driver of a specified vehicle is proof of that matter in the absence of proof to the contrary. Single judges have differed on what that requires of a defendant (Police v Dodd [2004] SASC 91 at [39]; Police v Young [2012] SASC 210 at [49] to [51]). Where identity is disputed, the evidence on it needs to be gathered early.
Can the charge be reduced to dangerous driving?
Sometimes. Section 19B(2) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act lists offences in order of seriousness, including extreme speed (section 19B(2)(ba)). At a trial for extreme speed, section 19B(3) allows a verdict of a less serious listed offence instead: reckless or dangerous driving under section 46, or careless driving under section 45, of the Road Traffic Act. Excessive speed under section 45A is not on the list, so it is not an alternative verdict.
Dangerous driving can also be charged as an alternative count, as in Shah ([3]). Speed alone can make driving dangerous: in Pimlott the driver was convicted after a trial of driving at a speed dangerous to the public at 176 km/h ([2] to [4]), and in Lehmann v Police [2010] SASC 102 the Court said driving at nearly twice the limit in a built-up area posed a significant danger to the public and was not trifling ([31]).
A dangerous driving verdict still carries 6 demerit points (Motor Vehicles Regulations 2025, Schedule 4) and a disqualification of at least 12 months for a first offence and 3 years for a subsequent offence, reducible for a first offence only if the court finds it trifling on sworn evidence (section 46(3)). The driving at a speed dangerous page covers that offence.
If a person is tried on a charge under section 29 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, they cannot be convicted of both that offence and extreme speed arising from the same circumstances. Extreme speed is an alternative verdict to the section 29 charge only if it was specified in the instrument of charge as an alternative (section 19ADA(6)).
What if someone is hurt?
An extreme speed offence that caused harm to a person is aggravated (section 5AA(1d)(a)), with the 5 year maximum and the 5 year minimum disqualification.
Where the driving causes death or harm, the offences of causing death or harm by dangerous driving in section 19A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act can also be charged. Driving in contravention of section 45A of the Road Traffic Act is a circumstance of aggravation for those offences (section 5AA(1a)(e)), and an aggravated first offence under section 19A carries a maximum of life imprisonment and a disqualification of at least 10 years (section 19A).
In R v Kitt [2022] SADC 5, offences arising from a collision in which two people died were aggravated because the driver was more than 45 km/h over the limit ([2]). In R v Bagnato [2011] SASCFC 161, Peek J noted in his dissenting reasons that the section 45A aggravation had been accepted on a plea although the forensic evidence put the speed only in a range of 100 to 117 km/h, and that charging and pleading to it made the maximum penalty in that case life imprisonment ([176] to [178]).
The speed alleged is a fact to test before any plea.
Can police take the car?
Yes. Regulation 4 of the Criminal Law (Clamping, Impounding and Forfeiture of Vehicles) Regulations 2022 prescribes indictable offences against Part 3 Division 6 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act as forfeiture offences. Extreme speed is in that Division and is indictable, so it is a forfeiture offence.
- Before the case ends: once a person is to be or has been reported for the offence, or has been charged or arrested, police can clamp or impound the vehicle allegedly used, or any vehicle the person is a registered owner of (section 5 of the Criminal Law (Clamping, Impounding and Forfeiture of Vehicles) Act 2007). The period is 28 days (section 6).
- On conviction: the court must, on the prosecution’s application, order the vehicle forfeited to the Crown (section 12(1)(a)(i)).
- Grounds to decline: severe financial or physical hardship to a person, the offence happened without an owner’s knowledge or consent, a credit provider would be significantly prejudiced, or the vehicle has been sold to a genuine purchaser (section 13(1)).
- Community service instead: if the court declines and community service is reasonably practicable, it must order up to 240 hours (section 13(2)).
The sentencing court must have regard to any use of these powers (section 4). Evidence of hardship, or of an owner’s lack of knowledge, is best gathered early.
Are there demerit points or a levy?
No demerit points are prescribed for extreme speed. Schedule 4 of the Motor Vehicles Regulations 2025 has no entry for section 19ADA. By contrast, excessive speed under section 45A carries 9 points and reckless or dangerous driving under section 46(1) carries 6 (Schedule 4, Part 2, clause 4).
A conviction attracts the victims of crime levy. The levy for an indictable offence is $466, and it is doubled for offences in Part 3 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act other than Divisions 13, 15 and 18 (Victims of Crime (Fund and Levy) Regulations 2018, Schedule 1, clauses 1(b) and 2). Extreme speed is in Part 3 Division 6, so the levy is twice $466. These are the levies in force from 1 July 2026.
How similar cases tend to play out
Three illustrations of how section 19ADA and the related provisions apply on ordinary facts. They are not predictions: the result in a real case turns on its evidence and the person’s history.
Lower range. A driver with a clean record is recorded by a fixed camera at 117 km/h in a 60 km/h zone late at night, with no other traffic. That is 57 km/h over a limit of 60 km/h or less, so it is extreme speed (section 19ADA(2)(a)). A first basic offence carries up to 3 years imprisonment and a disqualification of at least 2 years (section 19ADA(1), (5)). The owner offence in section 79B(2) does not apply to extreme speed. If the charge alleges who was driving, that allegation is proof unless the contrary is proved (section 175(1)(i), applied by section 19ADA(9)), and the camera certificates can be tested.
Middle range. A P-plater drives at 185 km/h on a 100 km/h road with two friends in the car and is stopped by police using a hand-held laser. That is 85 km/h over a limit above 60 km/h (section 19ADA(2)(b)). The provisional licence and the passengers each aggravate the offence (section 5AA(1d)(b)(iii), (iv)), so the maximum is 5 years and the disqualification at least 5 years (section 19ADA(5)(a)(i)(B)). Police can give an immediate notice lasting up to 12 months (section 19AF), and the laser reading needs a certificate under section 175(3)(baa) or other proof that the device was in order and properly operated (Zefi).
Upper range. A driver convicted of an excessive speed offence committed 3 years earlier drives at 170 km/h in an 80 km/h zone with a blood alcohol reading of .09. That is 90 km/h over (section 19ADA(2)(b)). The earlier conviction makes it a subsequent offence (section 19ADA(7)(a)), and the reading makes it aggravated (section 5AA(1d)(b)(vii)). The maximum is 5 years imprisonment, the disqualification is at least 5 years, and the car can be impounded for 28 days and forfeited on conviction (Criminal Law (Clamping, Impounding and Forfeiture of Vehicles) Act 2007, sections 5, 6 and 12).
How we defend an extreme speed charge
Most extreme speed cases turn on the speed evidence, the identity of the driver, the aggravation alleged and the immediate notice. We start with all four.
| Stage | What happens | What we do |
|---|---|---|
| Detection | Police may give an immediate notice under section 19AF and impound the car. | Check the notice and the 28 day impound period, and advise before any interview. |
| Disclosure | Camera photographs, certificates under sections 79B(10) and 175(3), testing records and statements. | Compare the certificates with the testing records, and ask how the device was set up and operated. |
| Charge review | Section 19ADA, with any aggravation stated in the charge (section 5AA(3)). | Write to the prosecution about the speed evidence, identity and the aggravation alleged. |
| Notice application | An application under section 19AF(6), if the facts support it. | Prepare the sworn evidence of exceptional circumstances and of the driver's risk to the public. |
| Hearing or sentence | A trial, or sentence with the mandatory disqualification and any forfeiture application. | Run the trial, or seek backdating under section 19AF(13) and argue any section 13 ground on the car. |
We cannot promise a particular result, and no lawyer can. We can make sure the prosecution proves every part of its case, starting with the speed.
Every hour matters. Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation, or call (08) 7094 2021 now.
Extreme speed case law
Police v Shah arose from an extreme speed prosecution, although the appeal concerned only the alternative dangerous driving charge. The other decisions come from related offences (dangerous driving at speed and excessive speed) or from proof of speed. The case notes say what each court decided.
| Case | Court | Principle | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|---|
| Police v Shah [2025] SASC 47 | Supreme Court | Police testing record was evidence to the contrary of a camera certificate | [3], [45], [48], [57] to [58] |
| Zefi v Commissioner of Police [2024] SASC 42 | Supreme Court | No evidence of how a laser was operated; conviction quashed | [48], [52], [55] to [56], [69] to [72] |
| Police v Butcher [2016] SASC 130 | Supreme Court | Laser test could not show the certified accuracy | [18] to [20], [22] |
| Police v Bulgin [2010] SASC 143 | Supreme Court | Certificates wrongly excluded; the defendant's onus to prove the contrary | [44] to [48] |
| Police v Pimlott [2011] SASC 214 | Supreme Court | Dangerous driving at 176 km/h; disqualification increased | [2] to [4], [13], [15], [20] to [21] |
| Lehmann v Police [2010] SASC 102 | Supreme Court | Nearly twice the limit in a built-up area was not trifling | [2], [31] to [32] |
| R v Kitt [2022] SADC 5 | District Court | Offences causing death aggravated by speed more than 45 km/h over the limit | [2] |
| R v Bagnato [2011] SASCFC 161 | Court of Criminal Appeal | Peek J's dissenting reasons on a section 45A aggravation | [176] to [178] |
Case notes
Police v Shah [2025] SASC 47
After a fixed camera recorded 123 km/h in a 60 km/h zone, the driver was acquitted of extreme speed and of the alternative charge under section 46(1), and police appealed only the alternative acquittal ([3], [5]). The certificate said the camera was set to operate under regulation 33 of the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous) Regulations 2014, then the regulation for locations other than intersections, marked foot crossings and level crossings; the police testing record referred to regulation 32, then the regulation for those locations ([8], [12] to [13]). That record was evidence to the contrary on the balance of probabilities, without the testing officers being called ([45], [48]), and the same applied to the certified setting ([57] to [58]). The magistrate’s reasons were adequate and the appeal was dismissed ([70] to [72]).
Zefi v Commissioner of Police [2024] SASC 42
The prosecution must prove a measuring device was in proper order and properly operated ([48]), and the section 79B(10) camera provisions do not apply to laser devices ([52]). The lack of cross-examination or defence evidence did not relieve the prosecution of that onus, and the magistrate had reversed it ([55] to [56]). With no evidence of how the laser was operated, the excessive speed conviction was quashed and an acquittal entered ([69] to [72]).
Police v Butcher [2016] SASC 130
On the rehearing of dangerous driving and excessive speed counts, the driver proved that the laser test was not capable of showing accuracy to the extent certified, because it was not the Australian Standard test ([18] to [19]). He had to prove that the test did not show the certified accuracy, and did not have to prove the gun was inaccurate ([20]). The police appeal was dismissed ([22]).
Police v Bulgin [2010] SASC 143
Camera and accuracy certificates for a 61 km/h reading were wrongly excluded; whether departures from the operating instructions affected the reading was a question for the trial ([44] to [45]). A defendant must do more than point to some evidence to the contrary to displace the presumption ([46]), and the Court noted the earlier view that the onus was only evidential ([47]). The case was sent back ([48]).
Police v Pimlott [2011] SASC 214
The driver was convicted after a trial of driving at a speed dangerous to the public, detected by laser at 176 km/h ([2] to [4]). Grossly excessive speed calls for deterrence ([13]), and the 12 month minimum disqualification imposed was increased to 18 months on the police appeal ([15], [20] to [21]).
Lehmann v Police [2010] SASC 102
The driver was charged with driving at a speed dangerous to the public and with exceeding the limit by 45 km/h or more ([2]). At nearly twice the limit in a built-up area, the dangerous driving could not be characterised as trifling ([31]). The appeal was dismissed ([32]).
R v Kitt [2022] SADC 5
A District Court decision at first instance. Offences arising from a collision in which two people died were aggravated because the driver was more than 45 km/h over the limit, contrary to section 45A ([2]).
R v Bagnato [2011] SASCFC 161
In his dissenting reasons, Peek J noted that the aggravation charged was driving in breach of section 45A, accepted on a plea although the forensic evidence gave only a range of 100 to 117 km/h, and that charging and pleading to it made the maximum penalty in that case life imprisonment ([176] to [178]).
Frequently asked questions
What speed is extreme speed in SA?
55 km/h or more over a limit of 60 km/h or less, or 80 km/h or more over a higher limit (section 19ADA(2)). That is 115 km/h in a 60 zone, 105 km/h in a 50 zone, 160 km/h in an 80 zone and 190 km/h in a 110 zone.
What is the penalty for extreme speed?
Up to 3 years imprisonment, or 5 years if aggravated, with no fine prescribed (section 19ADA(1)). The court must also disqualify the driver for at least 2 years, or 5 years for a first aggravated or any subsequent offence (section 19ADA(5)).
Can I just pay an expiation fee for extreme speed?
No. Extreme speed is a minor indictable offence and is not dealt with by expiation notice, so a court decides the charge.
How long will I lose my licence for extreme speed?
At least 2 years for a first basic offence and at least 5 years for a first aggravated or subsequent offence, and the court can order more (section 19ADA(5)(a)). The disqualification cannot be reduced, and it cancels the licence.
Can police take my licence straight away?
Yes. An officer who reasonably believes a driver committed extreme speed can give an immediate disqualification or suspension notice, which can last up to 12 months (section 19AF).
Can I get my licence back while the charge is pending?
Only if a court is satisfied, on sworn evidence, that exceptional circumstances exist and that the driver does not pose a substantial risk to other members of the public (section 19AF(6)). The Crown is entitled to be heard (section 19AF(7)).
How many demerit points is extreme speed?
None are prescribed in Schedule 4 of the Motor Vehicles Regulations 2025. The licence consequence comes from the disqualification.
Will police take my car?
They can. Extreme speed is a forfeiture offence, so police can impound the car for 28 days, and on conviction the court must order forfeiture on the prosecution’s application unless it declines on a section 13(1) ground such as severe hardship.
What if I was not the one driving?
The camera owner offence in section 79B(2) does not apply to extreme speed, so an owner is not guilty merely as owner. But section 175(1)(i) of the Road Traffic Act, which applies to extreme speed, makes an allegation in the charge that a specified person was the driver proof unless the contrary is proved. Evidence about who was driving should be gathered early.
Can extreme speed be reduced to a lesser charge?
At a trial, reckless or dangerous driving under section 46 and careless driving under section 45 of the Road Traffic Act are available as alternative verdicts (section 19B). Excessive speed under section 45A is not.
Do I need a lawyer for an extreme speed charge?
A conviction brings a disqualification of at least 2 years that no court can reduce, so the charge itself is the main thing to fight. We can advise on the speed evidence, the police notice and the options before the first court date. Call (08) 7094 2021.
South Australian courts we attend for extreme speed charges
We defend extreme speed charges in the Adelaide Magistrates Court and the suburban and regional Magistrates Courts listed below.
Courts we attend
Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation or call (08) 7094 2021.
Related traffic guides and case studies
Related Insights
Aggravated Police Pursuit Charge Withdrawn: Good Behaviour Bond Instead of Imprisonment
An aggravated charge of dangerous driving to escape a police pursuit was withdrawn after our written representations. Our client received a supervised good behaviour bond and no term of imprisonment.
Police Pursuit Charge Withdrawn: Aggravated Due Care and No Conviction for a P-Plater
Charged with dangerous driving to escape a police pursuit, a young P-plater had that charge withdrawn, pleaded guilty to aggravated due care and was discharged without conviction.
Dangerous Driving Basic Due Care Without Conviction | Case Study
No Conviction for Dangerous Driving Our client was charged with dangerous driving while driving a high powered sports car with provisional licence plates. After rigorously…