Coercive Control Is Now a Crime in NSW: Can a Pattern of Words, Isolation and Control Really Lead to Criminal Charges?
For years, many people thought domestic violence law only really dealt with bruises, broken property, threats, or obvious physical violence. But what about the partner who constantly monitors your movements, cuts you off from friends, humiliates you, controls your access to money, and makes you feel like you are walking on eggshells every day? What if the abuse is not one dramatic incident, but a slow, crushing pattern?
In NSW, that question is no longer just social or political. It is criminal. Since 1 July 2024, NSW has had a stand-alone offence of abusive behaviour towards a current or former intimate partner, commonly referred to as the coercive control offence. The offence was inserted into the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) by the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Coercive Control) Act 2022. The Judicial Commission of NSW explains that the offence criminalises a course of conduct of abusive behaviour by an adult against a current or former intimate partner, with the intention of coercing or controlling that person.
This is one of the most significant recent reforms in NSW criminal law. It also raises difficult questions. Where is the line between a toxic relationship and a criminal one? Can repeated words or messages amount to a serious offence? Does the prosecution need to prove the other person was actually afraid? And how will courts deal with allegations that unfold over months or years rather than in a single incident? Those are exactly the questions many members of the public are now asking.
What is the actual offence?
The starting point is section 54D of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). In broad terms, the prosecution must prove that an adult engaged in a course of conduct consisting of abusive behaviour towards a current or former intimate partner, intended that conduct to coerce or control the other person, and that a reasonable person would consider the conduct likely to cause one of the relevant forms of fear or serious impact set out in the section. The maximum penalty is 7 years’ imprisonment. The Judicial Commission’s Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book and Sentencing Bench Book both summarise the offence in those terms.
That maximum penalty matters. It does not mean every coercive control case will result in prison. But it does tell you Parliament regards the conduct as serious. The Judicial Commission’s sentencing materials remind courts that the maximum penalty is the legislature’s yardstick of seriousness. In other words, when Parliament sets a 7-year maximum, it is sending a clear signal that this is not a minor regulatory offence or symbolic reform.
What counts as “abusive behaviour”?
This is where the law becomes especially important for ordinary readers, because many people still assume abuse must be physical to be criminal. That is wrong.
Under section 54F, “abusive behaviour” is defined broadly. It can include violence, threats, intimidation, coercion or control, emotional or psychological abuse, economic or financial abuse, behaviour that isolates a person from family, friends or culture, behaviour that monitors, tracks or surveils a person, behaviour that harms or threatens animals, and behaviour that deprives a person of liberty or unreasonably controls their day-to-day activities. The statute is deliberately broad because coercive control often works through accumulation rather than a single dramatic event.
That breadth is one reason the offence attracts so much discussion. A person may think, “I never hit anyone, so how could this be a criminal matter?” But the point of the law is that abuse can operate through domination, isolation, monitoring, fear and dependency. The NSW Government’s coercive control information page describes coercive control as repeated behaviour that hurts, scares or isolates another person in order to control them.
Why a “course of conduct” matters
The offence is not aimed at one-off arguments or one bad text message taken in isolation. The law is aimed at a pattern.
Under section 54G, a “course of conduct” means conduct engaged in repeatedly or continuously, or conduct consisting of a number of acts over a period of time. The Judicial Commission’s suggested jury directions stress that the Crown does not need to prove each individual act, viewed alone, was itself intended to coerce or control. The focus is on the overall course of conduct. That is critical. It means courts are looking at the relationship pattern, not just one snapshot.
This is also why coercive control cases can feel very different from more familiar criminal charges. In a shoplifting case, the court often asks: did the person steal the item on that date? In a coercive control case, the court may instead be asking: over time, was there a repeated pattern of abusive behaviour designed to dominate the other person? That is a more factually layered inquiry, and it often involves messages, financial records, witness accounts, police histories, context evidence and relationship dynamics.
Does the prosecution have to prove the other person was actually afraid?
Not necessarily in the way many people assume.
One of the most important Judicial Commission points is that the prosecution does not have to prove what the other person actually thought or what the conduct actually caused in fact. The Bench Book explains that this element is concerned with what a reasonable person would consider likely, in all the circumstances, to be caused by the course of conduct. There may well be evidence from the complainant about fear, dependency or serious impact, but the legal test is not confined to whether the complainant says, “Yes, I was afraid.”
That matters because coercive and abusive relationships are often complicated. People may stay, recant, minimise, or struggle to describe what has happened to them. The Judicial Commission’s equality materials note that domestic violence can involve coercive dynamics that affect disclosure and may lead complainants to change or limit their evidence. Courts are alive to that reality.
Is there a defence?
Yes. Section 54E creates a defence, and that is one reason these cases should never be approached casually.
In broad terms, the legislation provides a defence where the conduct was reasonable in all the circumstances. Whether that applies in a particular case will depend heavily on the facts. That does not mean a defendant can simply say, “I thought I was being reasonable.” It means the court will examine what actually happened and whether the conduct can properly be characterised as reasonable rather than abusive. The Sentencing Bench Book notes expressly that section 54E provides a defence to the offence.
This is one of the areas where legal advice is especially important. The public conversation around coercive control is often moral and emotional. The court’s task is legal and evidentiary. A person may feel they were merely “checking in” on a partner, “protecting the relationship,” or “sorting out finances.” But if the conduct, viewed as a whole, looks like surveillance, isolation or domination, the legal analysis may be very different.
What sort of evidence might be used?
In practice, coercive control allegations may involve a wide range of material: text messages, emails, social media communications, bank transactions, GPS or location evidence, witness statements from family or friends, prior police call-outs, photographs, recordings, or evidence about how the relationship functioned over time. The 2025 NSW Police Domestic and Family Violence Guidelines say domestic and family violence is one of the largest areas of police work, with police responding to more than 500 domestic and family violence incidents on average each day, and they note that NSW Police delivered new training on the coercive control offence after it commenced on 1 July 2024.
That tells you two things. First, this offence sits inside a broader and very active domestic violence enforcement framework. Second, investigators are not approaching it as an obscure academic law reform. Police have trained for it, and the system is preparing to use it.
How do the courts view domestic violence offending more broadly?
This is where the Judicial Commission material is especially useful.
The Judicial Commission’s domestic violence sentencing resources emphasise that domestic violence offending is treated seriously by NSW courts and that reforms over recent years have expanded the law’s reach, including through broader definitions and new offences. The Commission’s Local Court and Sentencing materials also point to the need to consider the safety of the victim when making community-based sentencing orders for domestic violence offenders. Under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), a court must consider victim safety before making a CRO or CCO for a domestic violence offence.
That is a reminder that these cases are not treated as ordinary relationship disputes. Once the criminal law is engaged, courts are thinking about accountability, protection, deterrence and future risk.
What should you do if you are accused?
Do not assume the case is too vague to proceed. Do not assume there has to be physical violence for the allegation to be serious. And do not assume that because the relationship was complicated, the court will simply see it as “messy” and leave it there.
The right first questions are more practical. What is the alleged course of conduct? Over what time period? What material do police say supports it? Is there context that changes how the conduct should be understood? Is there a section 54E defence available? Are there related ADVO, stalking, intimidation or assault allegations? Those are the questions an experienced criminal defence lawyer should be asking from the beginning.
Contact Us
Allegations of coercive control can be legally complex, emotionally charged, and highly damaging to your future even before they are tested in court. If you have been accused of coercive control in NSW, of abusive behaviour towards a current or former intimate partner, or of a related domestic violence offence, it is important to get careful advice early from a lawyer who understands both the legislation and how these matters are being approached in practice.
National Criminal Lawyers® regularly advises people facing serious criminal allegations in NSW, including domestic violence, AVO-related matters and complex allegation patterns involving texts, finances, social media and relationship history.
Call us at 1800 CRIM LAW for a free consultation. Help us help you understand your situation and get you the best outcome possible.
