Obstructing Police Charges in Queensland
Police Powers — 2026-10-02 — by Sacha Sarah Smith, Civic Law
What counts as obstructing police in Queensland, why arguing or staying silent is different, what happens if police were not acting lawfully, and the penalties, tickets and community service rules.
An obstructing police charge can come out of a few seconds that went wrong. Someone pulls their arm back when an officer reaches for them, steps in while a friend is being arrested, or won’t stand still for a search. Sometimes the charge comes with a public nuisance charge from the same night, and sometimes it stands on its own.
The charge is laid under section 790 of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld). It is an offence to assault or obstruct a police officer while the officer is doing their job. “Obstruct” includes hindering, resisting, or trying to obstruct, so police do not have to show that you actually stopped them from doing anything.
What Police Have to Prove
The prosecution has to prove two things beyond reasonable doubt. The first is that what you did amounted to obstructing or assaulting the officer. The second is that the officer was lawfully doing their job at the time. Either can be wrong, and both are worth looking at closely.
Assault here has its ordinary Criminal Code meaning. It covers touching someone or applying any force to them without consent. It also covers a threatening gesture, where the person actually has, or appears to have, the ability to carry out the threat then and there. Swearing or shouting at an officer is not an assault on its own, because words without a gesture are not enough.
Getting in the way of a police dog or police horse that an officer is controlling counts as obstructing the officer.
Arguing, Refusing a Direction or Staying Silent
Many people charged with obstruction say all they did was argue, refuse to move, or refuse to answer questions. The law treats those things differently from obstruction.
Refusing to answer questions is a right. The chapter of the Act that deals with police investigations and questioning says that nothing in it affects your right to refuse to answer questions, unless a law requires you to answer. That right, and where it stops, is explained in Do You Have To Answer Police Questions in Queensland?
Not following a police direction is a separate offence under section 791 of the same Act. That covers a direction to move on, or a requirement to give your name and address when police find you committing an offence or suspect you have committed one. For most directions the maximum is a fine of $6,908. It is higher for ignoring a move-on direction in or near licensed premises or in a safe night precinct, where the maximum is $10,362. If the direction relates to another law that carries a higher penalty, the maximum under that law applies. Refusing to give your name and address can be dealt with by a $172 ticket. If police asked for your name because they suspected an offence, refusing is only an offence if that suspected offence is proved.
The Court of Appeal noted in Cox v Robinson [2000] QCA 454 that failing to comply with a police requirement used to be charged as obstructing police, and that the current Act makes it an offence of its own. If the only thing alleged against you is that you did not do what you were told, the obstruction charge needs to be looked at closely.
When Police Were Not Acting Lawfully
An officer who goes beyond their powers is not doing their job in the legal sense, and resisting them is not obstructing police. Searches and the use of force are two examples.
If someone obstructs a lawful search, the Act requires the officer, where it is reasonably practicable, to warn the person that obstructing police is an offence and give them a chance to stop. In MTJ v Commissioner of Police [2015] QDC 330, a young woman stepped away from a female officer who was about to pat her down at a bus stop late at night, and officers took hold of her without giving the warning. A District Court judge on appeal set aside her conviction. He found there had been time to warn her, and that arresting her without doing so was not lawfully carrying out a police duty. That was one judge deciding one case on its facts, and the Act itself recognises that a warning is not always practicable, for example where someone is already struggling.
Force raises the same question. Police may use the force reasonably necessary to make an arrest or exercise a power, and no more. In R v Hardy [2010] QCA 28, a man had been found guilty by a jury of three counts of seriously assaulting a police officer, all after the officer had handcuffed him. The Court of Appeal set aside the convictions and ordered a new trial, because the jury had not been told that if the officer used excessive force in handcuffing him, the officer was not acting in the execution of their duty while using that force. The court also said that resisting an unlawful arrest may not be an assault unless disproportionate force is used. Excessive force does not make the arrest itself unlawful, though. In R v Hawton [2009] QCA 248, the Court of Appeal said that officers who use excessive force lose the Criminal Code’s protection for that force, but the arrest is not unlawful because of it.
None of this makes it safe to resist police. If the arrest or search was lawful and the force was reasonable, resisting is the offence. Whether police acted lawfully is worked out afterwards from the officers’ statements and any body-worn camera footage. That is why any footage should be seen before anyone decides how to plead.
Accidents and Mistakes
The general rules of the Criminal Code apply to this charge as they do to any other. A person is not criminally responsible for something that happens independently of their will, such as a reflex, or being shoved into an officer by someone else. A person who acts on an honest and reasonable, but mistaken, belief about the facts is treated as if the facts had been what they believed. Both rules are about mistakes of fact. Under section 22 of the Code, not knowing the law is no excuse, so believing police had no power to do what they did does not help on its own. What matters is whether they actually had that power. Whether either rule helps in a particular case depends on the evidence.
When It Becomes Serious Assault of a Police Officer
The same conduct can also be charged as serious assault of a police officer under section 340 of the Criminal Code 1899 (Qld). That offence covers assaulting, resisting or wilfully obstructing police. It carries up to seven years imprisonment. The maximum is fourteen years if the person assaults the officer and bites or spits on them, throws or applies a bodily fluid or faeces to them, causes them bodily harm, or is or pretends to be armed with a dangerous or offensive weapon. The fourteen-year maximum applies only to an assault, not to resisting or obstructing. Which charge is laid is a decision for police and the prosecution.
A serious assault charge stays in the Magistrates Court if the prosecution chooses, and there the most a magistrate can impose is three years. If the magistrate decides that is not enough for the case, it goes to the District Court.
Penalties, Tickets and Community Service
For obstructing or assaulting police under section 790, the maximum is a fine of $6,908 or six months imprisonment. If it happens in or near licensed premises, such as a pub, club or bar, the maximum rises to $10,362 or twelve months.
For obstruction, but not for assault, police can issue a ticket instead of charging you. The fine is $518, or $1,036 in or near licensed premises. If the ticket is paid, you cannot be prosecuted in court for that offence.
If the prosecution charges, and proves, that the offence was committed in a public place while you were adversely affected by alcohol or drugs, the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) requires the court to order community service of between 40 and 240 hours, whatever else it orders. The Act counts a plea of guilty as a conviction for this purpose, so the order is required even if the court decides not to record a conviction. The only exception is where a physical, intellectual or psychiatric disability means the person could not do the work.
Whether a conviction is recorded is up to the court. It must consider the nature of the offence, your character and age, and the effect a recorded conviction would have on your work prospects and your life more generally. If a conviction is not recorded, it is generally treated as not being a conviction at all.
Civic Law acts for people charged with obstructing or assaulting police in Cairns and across Far North Queensland, whether they plead guilty or contest the charge.
Obstruct Police — Guilty Plea
Contested Hearing (Magistrates Court)