Criminal Courts, Australia methodology

Latest release
Reference period
2024-25 financial year
Release date and time
29/04/2026 11:30am AEST

Overview

Scope

Defendants (persons or organisations) whose case was finalised in criminal courts during the financial year 2024–25. Each case separately finalised will be counted. Tables exclude transfers of cases between court levels, unless specified.

Geography

Data are available for states and territories, and Australia.

Source

Administrative data is supplied to the ABS by courts administration agencies or statistical agencies in each state and territory.

Collection method

Administrative data for all finalised criminal court defendants in the Higher (Supreme and District/County courts), Magistrates’ and Children’s Courts are collected annually at the completion of each financial year. 

Concepts, sources and methods

History of changes

Principal offence based on the ANZSOC 2023 coding from 202324. Principal offence for prior years has been concorded from the original ANZSOC 2011 value.

Data collection

Scope and coverage

The Criminal Courts, Australia 2024–25 publication presents information about defendants whose case was finalised in the criminal jurisdictions of the Higher (Supreme and District/County Courts), Magistrates' and Children's Courts across Australia’s states and territories, during the reference period 1 July 2024 to 30 June 2025. Information is presented about the offences, outcomes and sentences associated with these defendants.

Time series data are generally presented for 2010–11 onward. Additional data can be found in earlier versions of this publication: Higher Courts from 1995, Magistrates' Courts from 2003–04, and the Children's Courts from 2006–07.

The following are not within the scope of the Criminal Courts collection:

  • Civil and coroners court cases
  • Appeal cases (including criminal appeals heard by the High Court of Australia)
  • Tribunal matters
  • Cases which do not require the adjudication of charges (e.g. bail reviews, extradition hearings, and applications to amend sentences or penalties)
  • Defendants for whom a bench warrant is issued but not executed
  • Finalisations in specialist courts, such as Drug Courts and Fine Recovery Units
  • Pre-court diversionary programs (e.g. warnings, cautions, drug diversions, conferencing)
  • Bench warrants in the Higher Courts
  • Referrals to mental health review tribunals (e.g. for determination of fitness for trial)
  • Mistrials and hung juries, where the case is not finalised
  • The small number of criminal cases finalised in the Federal Courts

The following offences (based on the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification, (ANZSOC) 2023) are excluded:

  • Breach of home detention (1441)
  • Breach of community-based sentencing order (1442)
  • Breach of sex offender requirements (1443)
  • Breach of sentencing orders, n.e.c (1449)
  • Breach of bail (1451)
  • Breach of parole (1453)
  • Offences against other justice orders and regulations, n.e.c (1459)

Defendants finalised on Cocos (Keeling) Islands and Christmas Island are included in the counts for Western Australia, where applicable. Defendants finalised in Jervis Bay Territory and Norfolk Island are not included. 

Data source

Statistics presented in this publication are compiled based on administrative unit record data supplied to the ABS by the agencies responsible for courts administration in each state and territory, except for Queensland (where data are supplied by the Office of the Government Statistician), and New South Wales (where data are supplied by the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research).

To ensure consistency between the states and territories, these agencies provide data coded to national classifications and standards.

Data processing

Counting methodology

The counting unit for this collection is the finalised defendant.

A finalised defendant is a person or organisation for whom all charges within a case have been formally completed so that they cease to be an active item of work for the court during the reference period.

The Criminal Courts collection does not count unique persons; instead, the following rules are applied:

  • Where a defendant is finalised for more than one case on the same date and in the same court level, their records are merged, and they are counted as one finalised defendant
  • Where a defendant is finalised for more than one case on separate dates within the reference period, they will be counted once for each date they were finalised
  • Where a defendant is finalised in the Magistrates' Courts whilst other charges are committed to and finalised in the Higher Courts, they will be counted once for each court level they were finalised in during the reference period

Transfers

The following counting rules apply with regards to defendants transferred from, or between court levels:

  • Defendants transferred from one Higher Court level to another Higher Court level (for example from a County Court to Supreme Court) are considered as finalised only once (from the level they finally left)
  • Defendants transferred from a Magistrates' Court or Children’s Court to a Higher Court (or vice versa) are considered as finalised twice (once in each of the courts)
  • Defendants transferred from a Magistrates' or Children's Court to Specialist Courts for finalisation (e.g. Drug Courts) are considered finalised (by transfer) in the criminal court that initiated the transfer. Defendants may then, upon completion of the program, return to the court that requested the transfer for an additional finalisation.

Transfers to other court levels are excluded from defendant counts in most tables to avoid double-counting of defendants who were transferred and subsequently adjudicated in a different court level. Excluding transfers enables a more accurate representation of defendant characteristics, particularly for more serious offences where transfers to a Higher Court are more common.

Data items

Defendants who were finalised for more than one offence will have counting rules applied to determine their principal method of finalisation, offence, sentence type and other characteristics for inclusion in data tables.

Age

The age presented in the Criminal Courts data refers to the age (in years) of defendants at the time of case finalisation. It is not the age at which the defendant committed the offence. A person can only be charged with a criminal offence if they are aged 10 years or over.

Sex

The categories used for defendant sex are: male, female, organisations, other and unknown. The number of defendants in the category of ‘other’ is currently not published due to small numbers and inconsistent use, though these defendants are included within the total. 

Indigenous status

This publication presents data on the Indigenous status of defendants finalised in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. Based on ABS assessment, Indigenous status data for Victoria and Western Australia are not of sufficient quality and/or did not meet the ABS Indigenous Status Standard required for inclusion in national reporting. The ABS continues to work towards improving the quality and coverage of Indigenous status data for this collection.

Indigenous status data are generally based on information collected and recorded by police and transferred to courts systems (upon defendant initiation in the courts). The police information is based upon self-identification by the individual (or via a response from next of kin/guardian). As such, the quality of the Indigenous status data presented in this publication is dependent on police seeking and recording this information, and whether it can be transferred to the courts administrative systems.

Defendants in court for traffic offences often do not have Indigenous status information recorded due to these offences usually being dealt with by road traffic authorities. As such, Driving causing serious injury (ANZSOC 2023 Subdivision 045) and Traffic and vehicle offences (ANZSOC 2023 Division 13) are excluded from Indigenous status tables and text. The transition to ANZSOC 2023 data from ANZSOC 2011 has impacted historical rates due to the expanded scope of Division 13 for ANZSOC 2023. Counts and rates are therefore no longer comparable with previously published data. 

Other offences actioned by prosecuting agencies other than police (and which may therefore have lower quality Indigenous status information), include: Fraud and related offences (ANZSOC 2023 Division 08); Offences against government (ANZSOC 2023 Division 15); Environmental offences (ANZSOC 2023 Division 16); and Miscellaneous offences (ANZSOC 2023 Division 17). The proportion of unknown Indigenous status should be considered when comparing defendants in these offence categories.

Court levels

Data are reported at three court levels: Higher Courts, Magistrates’ Courts, and Children’s Courts.

In this publication, the Higher Courts comprises the Supreme and Intermediate Courts. All states and territories have a Supreme Court that deals with the most serious criminal matters, generally referred to as indictable offences (e.g. murder, manslaughter, serious sexual offences, assault, drug trafficking, robbery). New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia also have an intermediate level of court, known as the District Court or County Court, which deal with most serious offences. All defendants that are dealt with by the Higher Courts have an automatic entitlement to a trial before a judge and jury. In some states and territories, the defendant may elect to have their matter(s) heard before a judge alone. Children treated as adults by the court may be included in the Higher Courts defendant counts.

The lowest level of Criminal Court is the Magistrates’ Court (also known as the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, Local Court or Court of Petty Sessions) which hears most criminal cases. Cases heard in the Magistrates’ Courts do not involve a jury; instead, a magistrate determines whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. Children treated as adults by the courts may also be finalised in the Magistrates' Courts.

Each state and territory have Children's Courts to deal with offences alleged to have been committed by a child or juvenile. These courts mainly hear summary offences but do have the power to hear indictable offences in some states and territories. Defendants are considered a child by the court if aged under 18 years at the time they committed an offence. Prior to February 2018, defendants in Queensland courts were considered to be a child only where they were aged under 17 years. 

Method of finalisation

Method of finalisation refers to how a charge is concluded by a criminal court. For defendants who had multiple charges with varying outcomes, the method of finalisation is assigned based on the following order of precedence:

  • Not guilty by reason of mental illness/condition
  • Defendant deceased
  • Unfit to plead
  • Guilty finding by court
  • Guilty outcome n.f.d.
  • Guilty plea by defendant
  • Guilty ex-parte (Magistrates’ Courts and Children’s Court only)
  • Agreement of wrongdoing (Children's Court only)
  • Acquitted by the court
  • Charge not proven n.f.d.
  • No case to answer at committal (Magistrates’ Courts and Children’s Court only)
  • Charge not proven n.e.c.
  • Committed for trial (Magistrates’ Courts and Children’s Court only)
  • Committed for sentence
  • Transfer of charges between court levels
  • Transfer to a non-court agency
  • Withdrawn by prosecution
  • Other non-adjudicated finalisation n.e.c.
  • Unknown/not stated

Principal offence 

Principal offence refers to the most serious offence (based on the ANZSOC 2023) associated with a finalised defendant. For defendants finalised with a single offence type, this is their principal offence.

Where a defendant has multiple charges, their principal offence is determined using a multi-step process. The first is to code the outcome for each offence to a method of finalisation group ranked as follows:

  • Defendant deceased, unfit to plead, or not guilty by reason of mental illness
  • Charges with a guilty outcome
  • Charges not proven
  • Transfer of charges to other court levels
  • Charges withdrawn
  • Other non-adjudicated finalisation
  • Unknown/not stated

The charge with the highest ranked method of finalisation group is allocated as the principal offence.

If there are multiple charges with the same method of finalisation group, the offence with the most serious sentence (based on the Sentence type classification 2023) is allocated as the principal offence. If multiple charges received the same sentence type, the offence with the greatest sentence length/amount is allocated as the principal offence.

The National Offence Index (NOI), which ranks offences according to perceived seriousness, is used to select the principal offence where there are multiple charges with the same method of finalisation group, sentence type and sentence length/amount.

For example, for a defendant with guilty outcomes for serious assault receiving a three-month sentence to custody in a correctional institution, and aggravated robbery receiving a nine-month sentence to custody in a correctional institution, the principal offence would be aggravated robbery. This is different from the methodology used in 2017–18 and prior years, where the derivation was based on the method of finalisation and NOI only, which would result in a principal offence of serious assault. Any charges for the same defendant that were withdrawn or not proven would not be considered.

Principal sentence 

A sentence is a penalty or order imposed by a court upon a defendant who has a guilty outcome for a criminal offence.

Defendants can receive:

  • A single sentence for a single offence with a guilty outcome
  • A single sentence for multiple offences with guilty outcomes
  • Multiple sentences for a single offence with a guilty outcome
  • Multiple sentences for multiple offences with guilty outcomes

Defendants with more than one sentence type (for either a single offence or multiple offences) are assigned a principal sentence, which is intended to reflect the most serious sentence based on the hierarchy of the Sentence type classification 2023.

Compound (or ‘complex’) sentences can be broadly defined as sentences served in the community that include various components or conditions, such as program attendance, community work, drug or alcohol treatment, counselling and education. These sentences are becoming increasingly common across states and territories due to their flexibility, with judges/magistrates able to tailor a sentence to suit the circumstances of an offender and their offending whilst providing for both restitution and rehabilitation.

The Sentence type classification 2023 has been designed to reflect the severity of compound sentences, and improve comparability of sentences within and across states and territories. The components or conditions imposed within each compound sentence are considered when coding to the classification so that sentences of a similar nature and level of severity are categorised together, regardless of the label of the order.

From 2022–23, data has been coded according to this approach and historical data for the years prior were approximated to the new classification. The application of the new classification has, for several jurisdictions, resulted in changes to the coding of some sentence orders. Refer to Data comparability – State and territory notes for more detail. 

Sentence length and fine amount

The sentence length and fine amount data presented in this publication represents the most severe penalty dealt to a defendant with a guilty outcome. This is determined using the Sentence type classification 2023 and the largest sentence length or fine amount dealt for that sentence.

The following rules are applied in specific circumstances:

  • For sentences with terms to be served concurrently (commencing at the same time) or cumulatively (one after the other), the sentence length or fine amount is the largest value associated with the principal sentence and so may not represent the full penalty served by the defendant for all offences.
  • For terms of imprisonment, the sentence length presented is the total period of the sentence imposed, not the 'minimum sentence' or non-parole period. The reported sentence length for 'custody in a correctional institution' usually includes time already served in custody on remand.
  • Sentence length data for partially suspended sentences reflects the full period (i.e. the period suspended and the period in custody).

Where a single sentence is given for multiple offence types (or multiple instances of a single offence type), this may result in an overstated sentence length or amount for the associated offence; that is, the value is actually imposed on more charges than the principal offence it is associated with.

Life and indeterminate sentences do not have a determined term and are excluded from mean and median sentence length calculations. However, defendants with these sentences are counted within the category of ‘10 years and over’ for length of time sentenced to custody in a correctional institution.

Duration

Duration is a measure of court timeliness. It represents the time taken (in days) between the date a defendant’s case(s) was initiated in court (through committal or registration) and the date they ceased to be an item of work for the court as follows:

Duration = (Date of finalisation - Date of initiation) + 1

Rate of defendants finalised

The (crude) rate of defendants finalised is expressed as the number of defendants (excluding organisations) per 100,000 of the ABS Estimated Resident Population (ERP), for persons aged 10 years and over. The ERP used in these calculations are based on the mid-point of the relevant reference period (e.g. 31 December 2024 for the 2024–25 reference period). Rates presented by sex and age are based on ERP for the relevant sex or age group.

The ERP used for 2021–22 to 2024–25 rates are from preliminary population estimates released for each year in National, state and territory population (reference periods December 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 respectively). For 2020–21 rates and earlier, final population estimates have been used.

Rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander defendants are expressed per 100,000 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population aged 10 years and over. The population used in these calculations are approximated from the mid-point between each 30 June estimate for 2016 to 2021, and from the medium assumption series projections for 2022 onwards (in Estimates and Projections, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, 2011 to 2031). 

Rates by Indigenous status are not included prior to 2016–17 in this release. Further work is required to determine an appropriate series of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander historical population estimates for comparative rates. For more information about this issue, please refer to the ABS article Guide to using historical estimates for comparative analysis and reporting

Rates for the non-Indigenous population are calculated using the total ERP for persons aged 10 years and over for the relevant state or territory, minus the projected Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population aged 10 years and over. 

Both the ERP estimates and projections used in this release exclude Christmas Island, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Jervis Bay Territory and Norfolk Island.

In addition to crude rates, age standardised rates have been included to account for age differences between the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous populations, with the former having a larger proportion of their ERP aged between 10 and 29 years. Due to the differing age profiles, using crude rates to examine differences between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous defendants may lead to erroneous conclusions being drawn about variables that are correlated with age.

Age standardisation removes age-related differences from rates by standardising to a single age profile that is common to both populations. The standard population used for age standardisation is the total Australian ERP as at 30 June 2001 (in National, state and territory population). The standard population is revised every twenty-five years with the next revision to be based on final estimates from the 2026 Census of Population and Housing.

Age-standardised rates should be used when comparing rates between the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous populations for the same state or territory. Crude rates should be used for all other purposes, for example, comparisons of rates between states and territories for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island population or for the non-Indigenous population.

Revisions in this release

  • Minor refinements to the preliminary ANZSOC 2023 offence coding for 2023–24 resulted in some changes in defendant counts across Divisions.
  • A correction to an error in the 2023–24 data used to calculate mean and median duration has resulted in revised values for Queensland, South Australia, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. 

 

Data release

Classifications

Classifications provide a framework for organising and presenting data in a comparable and consistent manner. The key classifications used for this collection are:

ANZSOC 2023

Offence data are coded to the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC), 2023

Method of finalisation

Method of finalisation refers to how a criminal charge is concluded by a criminal court. The Method of finalisation classification contains the main categories below.

  • Adjudicated finalisation: a charge has received a judgement or decision by the court as to whether or not the defendant is guilty
  • Non-adjudicated finalisation: a charge considered to have been completed even though a judgement has not been handed down by the court (e.g. withdrawn by prosecution, defendant deceased, unfit to plead, or transfers to non-court agencies)
  • Transfers to other court levels: a court order for the charge to be transferred to another court level for adjudication or sentencing.

Sentence type

The Sentence type classification 2023 describes the types of sentences that are handed down by the court for offences with a guilty outcome, and includes the main categories of:

  • Custody in a correctional institution
  • Intensive penalty in the community
  • Fully suspended sentence of imprisonment
  • Community service / work
  • Moderate penalty in the community
  • Monetary orders (largely fines)
  • Good behaviour (incl. bonds)
  • Nominal and other penalties.

The previous Sentence type classification was used for releases prior to 2022–23. However, earlier data has been transitioned to the new classification structure, where possible, to provide time series comparability. 

In some cases, defendants with a method of finalisation of 'Not guilty by reason of mental illness/condition' may have a type of order imposed. However, these sentences are not published for this collection.

Confidentiality

The Census and Statistics Act 1905 provides the authority for the ABS to collect statistical information, and requires that statistical output shall not be published or disseminated in a manner that is likely to enable the identification of a particular person or organisation. To minimise the risk of identifying individuals in aggregate statistics, perturbation has been applied to all data presented in this publication to randomly adjust cell values and summary variables. This technique involves small, random adjustment of the statistics and is considered the most satisfactory technique for avoiding the release of identifiable statistics while maximising the range of information that can be released. These adjustments have a negligible impact on the underlying pattern of the statistics.

The result of perturbation is that a given published cell value will be consistent across all tables, but the sum of the components of a total will not necessarily be the same as the published total. As such, proportions may add to more or less than 100%. Readers are advised to use the published totals rather than deriving totals based on the sum of component cells. Cells with small values may be proportionally more affected by perturbation than large values. Readers are advised against conducting analyses and drawing conclusions based on small values.

Data comparability

State and territory notes

Every state and territory has their own courts systems that operate under state and territory laws, determined by state and territory governments, that are largely independent of each other. 

National standards and classifications are used to produce nationally comparable data. However, various factors can impact data quality and comparability, including:

  • Data systems being designed for the purpose of administration of court business (as opposed to national statistical purposes)
  • Modification to data systems and methodology used to extract/compile data
  • Refinements to data quality procedures
  • Legislative or operational differences (such as differences in the types of sentencing options available to the courts).

New South Wales

Victoria

Queensland

South Australia

Western Australia

Tasmania

Northern Territory

Australian Capital Territory

Changes to multiple states and territories

Minimum age of criminal responsibility

The Australian Capital Territory raised the minimum age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 12 years in November 2023. The Northern Territory also raised the minimum age to 12 years in November 2023, before lowering it to 10 years again in October 2024. 

The Australian Capital Territory further raised the minimum age to 14 years in July 2025 (with some exceptions for very serious offences), and Victoria raised the minimum age from 10 to 12 years in September 2025. However, these latter changes will not impact data until 202526.

In all states and territories, defendants aged over 10 years may be charged with an offence against Commonwealth legislation.

Conference or diversion programs

The Children’s Courts in each state and territory offer diversionary programs to eligible defendants. These diversionary programs or conferences often include requirements of an apology, reparation and/or behaviour management programs.

In most states and territories, diversion programs are undertaken during the court process, after the youth defendant has agreed to their wrongdoing (not necessarily considered a formal guilty plea), with successful completion usually resulting in the charges being withdrawn or dismissed and no further penalty imposed. 

To ensure that diversion programs are able to be separately presented in national statistics as the ‘penalty’ served by the youth defendant, new classification categories and coding rules were introduced. From 2023–24, a new Method of finalisation for ‘Agreement of wrongdoing’ is available, and the number of youth defendants either sentenced to or agreeing to attend a ‘Conference or diversion program’ (regardless of whether it was completed) is available for principal sentence data. For New South Wales, Tasmania, and the Northern Territory the count represents defendants completing a diversion, and where it was not completed they will be counted under their subsequent sentence. 

In Queensland Children’s Courts, a diversion program can be ordered as the sentence for a youth defendant with a guilty outcome. However, the total count may be understated as some defendants who were referred to a restorative justice program are coded as receiving a nominal penalty, or acquitted following the dismissal of their charges.

The number and proportion of defendants in each state or territory commencing a diversion from the Children’s Court should also be considered in the context of diversionary options utilised prior to court (such as initiated by police). 

The changes to improve national consistency in recording of diversions will have the following effects on state and territory data:

  • New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania previously recorded Children's Courts defendants undertaking a diversion as having a guilty outcome and sentenced to a ‘Nominal penalty’ (or other various sentence types in Tasmania)
  • Prior to 2024–25, the Northern Territory recorded Children's Courts defendants undertaking a diversion as having a guilty outcome and sentenced to a 'Moderate penalty in the community'
  • South Australia and Western Australia previously recorded Children’s Courts defendants undertaking a diversion as being transferred to a non-court agency.
  • Queensland had previously already coded diversions to sentence type, 'Refer to conference' which has since been relabelled.

In the Australian Capital Territory, the Children’s Court can utilise diversion programs for eligible youth defendants, but this information is currently not able to be separately presented in ABS data.

Impact of COVID-19

From March 2020 onwards, Australia’s federal, state and territory governments put restrictions in place in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These restrictions led to a decrease in the number of defendants finalised due to the deferral of courts cases, and indirect impacts such as reduced motor vehicle use. Decreases in particular offence types contributed to overall changes in method of finalisation, sentence and duration. Increases in defendant numbers in later years may be due to rates of offending, but also delayed processing of older, pending cases.

Comparisons to other data

ABS crime and justice data

Some broad comparisons of data in this collection with other ABS crime and justice collections can be made (e.g. basic demographics or overall trends in offence types). For example, courts data can be broadly compared with the number of court-initiated police proceedings (refer to Recorded Crime - Offenders). However, the data in the two collections are not strictly comparable due to different counting rules and because: 

  • Not all court-related actions initiated by police will proceed to a criminal court (e.g. charges may be changed by police during the course of an investigation)
  • Prosecutions in a criminal court may be initiated by authorities other than police
  • Time lags occur between the police initiations (to court) and the finalisation of the defendant's matter(s) in court.

Report on Government Services

The Report on Government Services (RoGS), produced by the Productivity Commission, provides information on the performance of Australian state and territory government services, including courts. The RoGS report provides some information that is comparable to this collection, with both using the same national classifications and standards.

However, the focus of the two collections differs. The Courts chapter in the RoGS focuses on the efficiency and effectiveness of the administration of the courts, including workload indicators and financial information. This publication focuses on the characteristics of finalised defendants (e.g. demographics, offences and sentences).

Both collections have the ‘finalised defendant’ as a counting unit. However, the RoGS collection defines a defendant as ‘a person with one or more charges and with all charges having the same date of registration’. In comparison, the ABS collection defines a defendant as ‘a person or organisation against whom one or more criminal charges have been laid and which are heard together as one unit of work by a court at a particular level’ and uses the ‘date of finalisation’. This difference means that the count of finalised defendants can be lower in the ABS collection when compared with RoGS.

Both the RoGS and ABS data contain measures of court timeliness. The ABS presents a ‘duration’ measure, while the RoGS presents the pending caseload count as at 30 June each year, and the proportion of cases by length of time pending.

Transition to ANZSOC 2023 data

During 2022–23, the ABS conducted a review of the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification. The review was designed to modernise the language, reflect changes that have occurred in criminal legislation, and respond to emerging user requirements for further detail in some areas. The Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC), 2023 was released in November 2023.

From the ANZSOC 2011 to 2023 versions, there has been the introduction of new groups and subdivisions and an additional division, changes in the scope of existing categories, and expanded coding advice to support consistency.

The courts administration agencies or statistical agencies in each state and territory have subsequently implemented the new classification into their systems, updating the coding for each offence type in their jurisdiction. Some states and territories also identified improvements in existing coding, which resulted in additional changes in counts. Preliminary principal offence data coded to ANZSOC 2023 were released in Data cube 15 of Criminal Courts, 2023–24. Coding refinements were made to this data prior to the 2024–25 publication. Therefore, counts may differ and users are advised not to make comparisons with the preliminary data in the 2023–24 publication.

The associated National Offence Index (NOI), which ranks each ANZSOC 2023 group according to perceived seriousness, was also updated in April 2024 to align. The new rankings were incorporated into the derivation of the preliminary ANZSOC 2023 principal offence data. Where defendants had more than one offence in the same case, this may have contributed to changes in their derived principal offence.

Concordances are available that show the detailed relationship between the ANZSOC 2011 and ANZSOC 2023 editions of the classification. These concordances are provided in the Downloads section of Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC), 2023.

Prior to 2023–24, principal offence data was coded to ANZSOC 2011, and historical data in this release has been concorded to a ANZSOC 2023 principal offence value. This has been presented in time series tables to provide a relatively comparable output. However, the concorded data should be used with caution as this was not re-coded and re-processed at the unit record level so changes in the NOI (such as the elevation of animal cruelty offences), and any coding adjustments by states and territories, were not incorporated.

To apply the concordances to ANZSOC 2011 data in 2022–23 and prior years, the following approach was used:

  • ANZSOC 2011 Groups with a 1:1 concordance, were coded to their respective ANZSOC 2023 Group. Changes in specific inclusions within groups could not be re-coded
  • ANZSOC 2011 Groups split across more than one ANZSOC 2023 Group within the same Subdivision were coded to that Subdivision n.f.d
  • ANZSOC 2011 Groups split across more than one ANZSOC 2023 Group and Subdivision but within the same Division, were coded to that Division n.f.d
  • ANZSOC 2011 Groups split across multiple ANZSOC 2023 Groups, Subdivisions and Divisions, were coded to the Division expected to receive the greatest proportion of defendants.

Some changes to the offences included within ANZSOC Groups were not able to be applied to data prior to 2023–24. For example:

  • Possession of pipes, syringes, or other utensils associated with the use of drugs was previously included in ANZSOC 2011 Group 1099 Other illicit drug offences n.e.c., but these offences are now an inclusion in ANZSOC 2023 Group 0941 Unlawful possession of drugs. As these offences could not be separately concorded, ANZSOC 2023 Group 0941 is understated prior to 2023–24, but counts are included within Division 09 Drug offences.
  • Refusing a preliminary breath or drug test was an inclusion in ANZSOC 2011 Group 1439 Regulatory driving offences n.e.c., but these offences are now an inclusion in ANZSOC 2023 Group 1422 Resist or hinder a police officer or justice official. As these offences could not be separately concorded, ANZSOC 2023 Group 1422 is understated prior to 2023–24, with these defendants included within Division 13 Traffic and vehicle offences.

Family and domestic violence statistics

The data presented in the Family and Domestic Violence (FDV) section are experimental, with further assessment required to ensure comparability and quality. Caution should be exercised when using the data and making comparisons across states and territories, and over time.

For this data, an FDV-related principal offence includes selected ANZSOC 2023 categories of Homicide (Division 01), Assault (Division 02, excluding Assault of a prescribed officer from 2024–25), Sexual offences (Division 03), Harm or endanger persons (Division 04, excluding Driving causing serious injury), Property damage (Division 11), and Breach of restraining order – violence (Group 1411).

Additional data are also included relating to all defendants who were finalised for an offence of FDV-related 'breach of restraining order – violence’.

This release presents experimental statistics about defendants finalised for at least one Family and Domestic Violence (FDV) offence, in the Higher, Magistrates’ and Children’s Courts between 1 July 2024 and 30 June 2025.

Definition

There is no single nationally or internationally agreed definition of what constitutes ‘family and domestic violence’, and the terminology used to refer to ‘FDV behaviours’ varies across policy, legislative, service provision, and research contexts. Further, understandings of FDV continue to evolve, including the behaviours and/or relationship types that are considered to be familial or domestic in nature.

FDV can include a wide range of violent and non-violent abusive behaviours or threats, such as:

  • Physical and sexual violence or abuse
  • Emotional and psychological abuse
  • Verbal abuse and intimidation
  • Economic abuse
  • Social deprivation and controlling behaviours
  • Damage of personal property
  • Abuse of power.

The types of relationships involved in FDV can include (but are not limited to):

  • Intimate partner relationships
  • Other family and co-habitation relationships
  • Siblings
  • Children
  • Carer relationships
  • Cultural and kinship relationships
  • Foster care relationships
  • Relatives who do not co-habit.

Differences in the state and territory legislation used to determine the types of behaviours and relationships that constitute a family and domestic violence offence should be considered when interpreting data.

FDV data collection

The experimental FDV data in this publication are based on information recorded in state and territory court administrative systems. FDV offences are largely identified by an indicator (or ‘flag’) that is recorded by either the police and/or courts, as follows:

  • In Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory police officers flag FDV offences, following investigation/charging, on their crime recording systems. This is transferred through or linked to courts administrative systems.
  • In New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania, FDV offences are identified by FDV-specific legislation and are flagged either by police or when the matter is dealt with by the court.

Additional FDV offences may be identified through: the offence legislation and description; court hearing type; or if they are ordered to be flagged as FDV-related by the judiciary.

Substantial improvements in the identification of FDV offences have been made in several states in recent years, so increases in defendant counts may reflect this along with any real-world change.

Given these differences in how FDV offences are identified or defined, direct comparisons of the state and territory FDV data presented in this publication should not be made.

FDV data processing

Counting methodology

The principal counting unit for the experimental FDV data is a defendant who has been finalised for at least one FDV-related offence during the reference period.

Where a defendant has had multiple FDV offences finalised on the same date within the same court level, they will be counted once and assigned a principal FDV offence based on the method of finalisation, sentence outcome and the National Offence Index 2024 (NOI 2024). This is consistent with the counting methodology for the broader defendant population.

Non-FDV offences (i.e. those that are not flagged) are excluded from the data prior to determination of a defendant’s principal FDV offence. As such, principal FDV offence data are not directly comparable with principal offence data presented elsewhere in this publication.

In line with ABS policy on data confidentiality, table cells containing small values have been randomly adjusted through perturbation. As such, the sum of the components will not necessarily give the same result as the published total.

FDV-related breach of restraining order violence

The additional data on FDV-related 'breach of restraining order violence’ offences is intended to inform the growing need for statistics relating to FDV in the national policy and service space. These data complement similar information included in Recorded Crime - Offenders.

Under usual methodology, the count of FDV-related breach offences appears understated because these offences are often heard alongside ‘more serious’ FDV-related offences (e.g. assault), which usually become the principal FDV offence for the defendant. 

Unlike other parts of this release where only principal offence is counted, the tables specific to FDV 'breach of restraining order violence' includes all defendants who were finalised for this offence, regardless of any other offences for which they were also finalised at the same time. This presents a more complete picture of the number of FDV-related 'breach of restraining order violence' offences.

Users are advised against making state and territory comparisons of FDV breaches data due to the variations in policing and court practices.

FDV data comparability

The comparability of FDV data may vary over time, both within and across states and territories, due to a number of factors including:

  • Differences or changes in state and territory police/court operations and business rules
  • Differences in state and territory legislation with regard to the relationships and/or offences that are defined as FDV-related
  • Differences or changes in the reporting behaviour of victims
  • Improvements in the quality or availability of FDV data and flagging recorded on police and courts administrative systems.

State and territory FDV-related notes

This section describes state and territory specific events or processes (e.g. recording practices or legislation changes) that may impact on the availability, and/or comparability of state and territory FDV data. The notes relating to the collection as a whole are also applicable to FDV data.

New South Wales

In New South Wales, FDV offences can be identified either by the associated legislative reference, or when the courts make an order for the ‘Offence to be recorded as a domestic violence offence’. 

The flagging of offences against Commonwealth legislation can only be made by the courts through such an order. While this process is open to the courts, these orders are (currently) rarely applied to Commonwealth offences. From 2022–23, Commonwealth harassment offences (coded to ANZSOC 2023 Subdivision 044 Acts that threaten, harass, or control) are flagged as FDV-related if they occurred on the same date as an FDV-related 'breach of restraining order violence'.

Queensland

While the most common FDV principal offence across the country is assault, in Queensland, breaches of restraining orders account for a greater proportion. This has been due to police operational differences, whereby in Queensland if there was an existing restraining order, a breach of that order was recorded but the associated assault may not have been recorded. However, from 1 July 2021, Queensland police officers must record all criminal offences associated with an FDV incident. This resulted in an increase in the number of defendants of FDV-related assault.

South Australia

The transfer of the FDV flags from the SA Police data management system to the court system is incomplete where information for a new case is manually entered instead of using the Police Case Number, causing FDV cases to be understated. From 2021–22, additional methods of identifying FDV-related offences were introduced which has offset this and resulted in a substantial increase in counts of FDV defendants in South Australia. Users are advised not to compare data from 2021–22 to previous years.

Western Australia

Information relating to FDV offenders is recorded by Western Australia Police on two separate crime recording systems: the Information Management System and the Prosecutions system. Only data from the Prosecutions system transfers through to the criminal courts administrative systems. As such, statistics about FDV defendants for Western Australia may be understated.

In 2023–24, an improvement in the identification of sexual assault offences as being FDV-related resulted in an increase in these counts, especially in the Higher Courts.

From 2021–22, additional breach of restraining order offences have been identified as FDV-related, which resulted in an increase in FDV defendant counts in Western Australia. Users are advised not to compare data from 2021–22 with previous years.

Tasmania

Tasmanian data about defendants with FDV-related offences is only available for defendants for which the victim(s) are partner/spouse/husband/wife/boyfriend/girlfriend (including former). This is a narrower relationship scope than other jurisdictions, and has a greater impact on sexual offences than other FDV offences. Users are cautioned in making comparisons between Tasmania and other states and territories.

Improvements during 2020–21 in the identification of family violence related offences in the courts, resulted in a notable increase in the number of defendants with an FDV offence, in particular a breach of restraining order. All offences against the ‘Family Violence Act’ are now flagged as FDV-related.

Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification, 2023

Show all

Method of finalisation classification

Show all

Sentence type classification

Show all

Glossary

Show all

Feedback

The ABS welcomes and appreciates feedback from users of these statistics on any aspect of the release. Please send written feedback to: crime.justice@abs.gov.au

Back to top of the page