Introduction

“Reasonable” — it is a word plastered all over legislation, and it is certainly said every day in courts. You would think that such an important term has a clear definition; however, it does not at all. Instead, it is a complex and situational idea, which you can understand better by reading this article. Reasonable force is a critical concept in NSW, governing both police arrests and self-defence situations. It ensures that the force used is proportionate to the threat and is essential for protecting individuals and maintaining public safety. Understanding this concept is vital for both law enforcement and the general public to navigate complex legal situations effectively.

This guide provides a comprehensive overview of reasonable force, covering its legal definition, application in police arrests, and self-defence contexts. It explores the legal framework, practical examples, and key considerations to help readers understand their rights and responsibilities. By examining real-world scenarios and legal precedents, this guide aims to clarify the nuances of reasonable force and its implications in NSW.

Definition and Legal Framework of Reasonable Force in NSW

Legal Definition of Reasonable Force

In NSW, reasonable force refers to the minimum amount of force necessary to prevent harm or crime, or to effect a lawful arrest. It is determined by the reasonable person standard, which assesses whether an ordinary individual would view the force as appropriate under the circumstances.

This principle ensures that any force used remains proportionate to the threat encountered and is applied only while that threat is imminent. Specifically, key aspects of reasonable force include:

• Proportionality: Matching the level of force to the severity of the threat.
• Necessity: Employing force only when no viable alternative exists to prevent harm or crime. It must be a last resort.
• Legal Standards: Adhering to the requirements set out in the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) (LEPRA) and relevant common law principles.

Conversely, excessive or disproportionate force—such as hitting a restrained individual—constitutes assault under the law.

Requirement of Proportionality and Necessity

The use of force must satisfy both proportionality and necessity, whether in law enforcement or self‑defence contexts. Factors that guide this assessment include:

• Severity of the Threat: Ensuring the force corresponds to how serious the threat is.
• Behaviour of the Individual: Considering whether the person is resisting, fleeing, or posing an immediate danger.
• Presence of Weapons: Acknowledging that the use or threat of weapons may justify higher levels of force.
• Risk to Safety: Protecting the safety of officers, the public, and the individual involved.

For example, handcuffing or using a baton may be reasonable under certain circumstances. In contrast, chokeholds or unnecessary taser deployment are generally deemed excessive. Ultimately, the assessment is objective, considering all relevant circumstances, including the suspect’s conduct and any weapons involved. It should be noted that this “objective” test often seems subjective, as the courts have a notion of a “reasonable” person which, of course, cannot be exactly defined for every scenario. This is where the help of a skilled and experienced criminal lawyer is essential, since navigating these tricky complexities alone is extremely difficult. 

Moreover, the legal framework—particularly LEPRA—emphasises that any force used must be reasonable, appropriate, and proportionate to the situation, thereby ensuring accountability and transparency in its application.

Application of Reasonable Force in Police Arrest Context

Use of Force in Arrest under LEPRA

Police officers in NSW are authorised under section 231 of the LEPRA (NSW) to use reasonable force when making an arrest. This provision specifies that officers may employ any force that is “reasonably necessary” to effect an arrest or prevent escape, meaning it must be proportionate to the threat posed and the circumstances at hand.

Key factors influencing the reasonableness of force include:

• The severity of the offence
• The suspect’s behaviour and level of resistance
• The presence of weapons or potential threats
• The need to protect public and officer safety

For instance, if a suspect is armed or actively resisting, officers may escalate to baton strikes or taser use to subdue the individual. Conversely, when a suspect is cooperative, minimal force (such as handcuffing) is typically sufficient.

Approved Techniques and Tactical Options

Officers receive training in various approved techniques designed to minimise harm while ensuring compliance. Common tactics include:

• Handcuffing to restrain movement
• Leg sweeps to bring a suspect to the ground
• Baton strikes to subdue resistance
• Taser deployment for non-lethal incapacitation
• Weaponless control methods, such as joint locks or holds

The NSW Police Use of Force Manual emphasises that even these approved methods must be justified by the specific situation. For example, a leg sweep may be reasonable against an actively resisting suspect but could be excessive if used on someone who is compliant.

In addition, the manual introduces the Tactical Options Model and the STOPAR method—Stop, Think, Observe, Plan, Act, Review—to guide dynamic risk assessment. Officers are trained to continuously evaluate each encounter and adjust their tactics accordingly, ensuring that any force remains both proportionate and necessary.

Finally, all instances of force must be thoroughly documented. Officers are required to record the type of force used along with the reasons behind it, thereby maintaining transparency and accountability.

Application of Reasonable Force in Self Defence Context

Legal Basis for Self Defence

Under NSW law, self‑defence is a legally recognised justification for using reasonable force to protect oneself or others from harm. Section 418 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and common law principles outline this legal basis, stating that a person is not criminally responsible for an offence if they carry out conduct constituting the offence in self‑defence.

Specifically, for force to be considered lawful in self‑defence, it must meet two criteria:

• The person must believe the conduct is necessary to defend themselves or another person.
• The conduct must be a reasonable response to the circumstances as perceived by the individual at the time.

Guidelines for Using Force in Self Defence

Because self‑defence must involve reasonable and proportionate force, the law looks at several key factors:

• Imminent Threat: The threat must be immediate and unlawful.
• Proportionality: The force used must be proportionate to the threat faced—for example, using lethal force in response to a minor threat would generally be considered excessive.
• Necessity: There must be no other reasonable way to avoid the threat, such as retreating from the situation.

Examples of Reasonable Force in Self-defence

The following scenarios illustrate what may constitute reasonable force:

• Using physical restraint to prevent an attacker from causing harm.
• Employing non‑lethal force, such as pepper spray, to incapacitate an aggressor.

Circumstances Justifying Self-defence

Reasonable force may also be justified in specific contexts, such as:

• Protection of Property: Preventing unlawful interference with property, for example theft or vandalism.
• Defence of Others: Protecting another person from harm with necessary force.

Key Considerations

However, certain considerations are crucial to bear in mind:

• Excessive Force: Using force beyond what is necessary to neutralise a threat can lead to criminal charges, even if the initial act was in self‑defence.
• Legal Advice: If charged with an offence related to self‑defence, consulting a criminal defence lawyer is crucial to navigate the legal complexities and ensure the best possible outcome.

Case Study: The Curtis Scott Example

Overview of the Curtis Scott Case

The Curtis Scott case highlights the complexities and challenges in determining what constitutes reasonable force during a police arrest. In 2022, Curtis Scott—a professional rugby league player—was involved in an incident that led to his arrest by NSW Police.

Body‑cam footage of the arrest drew widespread attention and raised important questions about police use of force. Among other things, the footage showed:

• officers attempting to wake Scott, who was asleep under a tree,
• deploying a Taser,
• handcuffing him,
• and repeatedly instructing him not to resist.

As the situation escalated quickly, all charges against Scott were eventually withdrawn, with the court criticising the police actions as excessive and unreasonable.

Lessons Learned and Legal Implications

The Curtis Scott case provides valuable insights into the application of reasonable force during police arrests. It underscores the importance of proportionality and necessity, as outlined in the LEPRA, and highlights the legal implications when force exceeds what is deemed reasonable.

Key lessons from the case include:

• Proportionality of Force: The use of Tasers and physical restraint on Scott—who was initially non‑resistant—was questioned by the court, emphasising that force must always be proportionate to the threat posed.
• Accountability and Transparency: By releasing body‑cam footage, the case demonstrated the crucial role of transparency in determining the legality of police actions and ensuring accountability.
• Legal Consequences: The withdrawal of charges and the court’s criticism of police conduct illustrate the legal ramifications of using excessive force, reinforcing the need to understand and adhere to the legal framework governing police powers.

Ultimately, the Curtis Scott case serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between maintaining public safety and respecting individual rights. It also emphasises the need for ongoing training and oversight to ensure that officers apply force in a manner that is lawful, proportionate, and necessary.

Application of Reasonable Force in Police Arrest Context

Use of Force in Arrest under LEPRA

Under the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (LEPRA), police officers in NSW are authorised to use reasonable force when making an arrest. Section 231 of LEPRA specifies that officers may use such force as is “reasonably necessary” to effect an arrest or prevent escape.

This means the force employed must be proportionate to the threat posed and the circumstances of the situation. Key factors influencing the reasonableness of force include:

• The severity of the offence
• The suspect’s behaviour and level of resistance
• The presence of weapons or potential threats
• The need to protect public and officer safety

For instance, if a suspect is armed or actively resisting, police may employ greater force, such as baton strikes or taser use, to subdue the individual. Conversely, if a suspect is cooperative, minimal force, such as handcuffing, is typically sufficient.

Approved Techniques and Tactical Options

Police officers are trained in various approved techniques to apply force during arrests. These methods are designed to minimise harm while ensuring compliance.

Common tactics include:

• Handcuffing to restrain movement
• Leg sweeps to bring a suspect to the ground
• Baton strikes to subdue resistance
• Taser deployment for non-lethal incapacitation
• Weaponless control techniques, such as joint locks or holds

The NSW Police Use of Force Manual emphasises that even approved methods must be justified by the circumstances. For example, a leg sweep might be reasonable if a suspect is actively resisting but could be deemed excessive if used on a compliant individual.

The manual also introduces the Tactical Options Model and the STOPAR method (Stop, Think, Observe, Plan, Act, Review) to guide dynamic risk assessment. Officers are trained to continuously evaluate situations and adjust their tactics accordingly, ensuring that force remains proportionate and necessary.

Ultimately, the use of force by police must always be documented and justified. Officers are required to record the type of force used and the reasons behind it, ensuring transparency and accountability.

Identifying and Reporting Excessive Force

Recognising What Constitutes Excessive Force

Excessive force occurs when the level of force used by police or individuals exceeds what is reasonably necessary to prevent harm, prevent crime, or effect a lawful arrest. It is essential to identify such instances to ensure accountability and protect individual rights.

Examples of excessive force include:

• Unnecessary physical restraint: Hitting or kicking a person who is already restrained.
• Disproportionate use of weapons: Deploying tasers or batons when there is no immediate threat.
• Dangerous restraints: Using chokeholds or kneeling on a person’s back, which can lead to serious injury or death.
• Prolonged force: Continuing to apply force after the threat has been neutralised.

When assessing whether force is excessive, consider factors such as the severity of the threat, the suspect’s behaviour, the presence of weapons, and the overall risk to safety. For example, using a leg sweep on a non‑resisting individual—as seen in the Curtis Scott case—can be deemed excessive.

Steps to Report and Seek Legal Advice

If you believe excessive force has been used against you or someone else, take the following steps promptly:

1. Document the incident
   • Record as many details as possible: date, time, location and the officers involved.
   • If injuries occurred, seek medical attention immediately and photograph any visible damage.
2. Gather evidence
   • Collect witness statements, video footage or photographs that support your account.
3. File a formal complaint
   • Submit your complaint to the Law Enforcement Conduct Commission (LECC), the oversight body responsible for investigating misconduct by NSW police officers.
4. Consult a criminal defence lawyer
   • Seek advice from a qualified professional who specialises in excessive force cases. They can guide you through the legal process and help you explore your options for seeking justice.
5. Consider civil action
   • If excessive force has resulted in injury or harm, you may have grounds for a civil claim to seek compensation.

Moreover, understanding your rights and taking prompt action are vital. If you believe your rights have been violated, contacting a trusted legal expert—such as those at Daoud Legal—can provide the guidance and support needed to navigate the legal system effectively.

Conclusion

Reasonable force in NSW is a critical legal concept that applies to both police arrests and self-defence situations. It ensures that the force used is proportionate to the threat and is essential for protecting individuals and maintaining public safety. Understanding this concept is vital for both law enforcement and the general public to navigate complex legal situations effectively.

If you have questions about reasonable force or need legal advice, contact the experienced criminal defence lawyers at Daoud Legal in Sydney. Our experts can provide guidance on your rights and responsibilities, ensuring you understand how to navigate situations involving the use of force. Don’t hesitate to reach out today for trusted legal support.

Frequently Asked Questions