03 9070 9810

Hidden Camera in Your Rental Property or Airbnb

Civil claims and criminal complaints for tenants and guests subjected to covert surveillance.

Book a Confidential Assessment ($770)

Max file size: 20MB

Your Rights When You Discover a Hidden Camera

If you have found a hidden camera in a rental property, Airbnb, or short-stay accommodation in Australia, you now have a direct civil right of action against the person responsible. Since 10 June 2025, the statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy under Schedule 2 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) allows individuals to claim compensation of up to approximately $478,550 in non-economic loss, with exemplary damages available in exceptional cases. You do not need to prove you suffered financial loss. The tort is actionable without proof of damage.

Covert surveillance in a property where you live or stay is a clear case of intrusion upon seclusion, one of the two pathways under the statutory tort. A landlord, property manager, or Airbnb host who installs or fails to remove a hidden camera in a bathroom, bedroom, or other private area has, on any reasonable view, invaded your privacy, resulting in a serious invasion.

This is also likely a criminal offence under state surveillance legislation. That gives you a dual-track approach: a criminal complaint to police, and a civil claim for damages in court. The two processes run independently. You do not need to choose one or the other.

The clock is ticking. You may have as little as 12 months from when you became aware of the surveillance to commence proceedings. If you have discovered a hidden camera, preserve the evidence and seek legal advice promptly.

Discovery of Hidden Cameras: Preserve Evidence and Contact Us.

Do not remove, destroy, or confront anyone about the device until you have taken photographs, noted its location, and spoken to a lawyer. Early action protects your claim.

How We Act for Tenants and Guests

A structured approach to hidden camera claims under the new statutory tort.

Legal representation for privacy rights in rental properties

Civil Claim Under the Statutory Tort

<p>The statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy provides a direct cause of action against any person who installs, maintains, or knowingly permits a hidden camera in a rental property, Airbnb, or short-stay accommodation. The claim does not depend on whether the defendant is an APP entity. You can bring proceedings against an individual landlord, a property management company, a corporate host, or an accommodation platform operator.</p><p>The tort covers intrusion upon seclusion. A hidden camera in a bathroom, bedroom, or living area of a property you occupy is a classic example. The court will assess whether the invasion was serious, whether the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly, and whether the plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy. In most hidden camera cases, these elements are straightforward.</p><p>Remedies include compensatory damages (capped at approximately $478,550 for non-economic loss), exemplary damages in cases involving deliberate and calculated conduct, injunctions to restrain ongoing surveillance, and orders for the delivery up or destruction of any recordings.</p>

Dual-track legal approach for hidden camera cases

Criminal Complaint Under State Surveillance Law

<p>Hidden cameras in rental properties are likely to constitute criminal offences under state surveillance legislation. The criminal track runs alongside the civil claim. A successful prosecution strengthens your civil case, though it is not a prerequisite.</p><p>In Victoria, the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 makes it an offence to install an optical surveillance device to observe a private activity without consent. "Private activity" includes activity in a bathroom, bedroom, or similar space within a building. In NSW, the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (s8) prohibits the installation or use of an optical surveillance device to record or observe a private activity without consent, where this involves entry onto premises or interference with property without consent. Penalties can include up to five years imprisonment. In Queensland, there is no general optical surveillance offence, which makes the Commonwealth statutory tort the primary civil remedy.</p><p>State surveillance legislation creates criminal offences, not civil remedies. You cannot sue under the Surveillance Devices Act. The civil remedy is provided by the Commonwealth statutory tort. However, a breach of state law is a factor the court may consider when assessing the seriousness of the invasion and any award of damages.</p>

Urgent legal action for hidden surveillance in rentals

Urgent Injunctions and Interim Relief

<p>Where surveillance is ongoing, or where there is a risk that recordings may be published, copied, or distributed, urgent injunctive relief may be necessary. The statutory tort expressly provides for injunctions to restrain a serious invasion of privacy.</p><p>If you have discovered a hidden camera and believe the landlord, host, or property manager may still have access to recordings, or if you suspect the camera is streaming live footage, an urgent application to the court can compel the defendant to cease surveillance, preserve recordings for evidence, and refrain from distributing any material captured.</p><p>We are available to act on short notice for urgent privacy injunction applications. The court has the power to make interim orders before the matter is fully heard, which can provide immediate protection while the claim is prepared.</p>

The Law in Detail: Hidden Cameras in Rental Properties and Airbnbs

Who Can You Claim Against?

Under the statutory tort, you can bring a claim against any person or entity responsible for the hidden camera. This includes individual landlords, property management companies, corporate accommodation providers, Airbnb hosts, and short-stay platform operators. The defendant does not need to be an APP entity under the Privacy Act. This is a significant advantage over the OAIC complaint pathway, which only covers organisations bound by the Australian Privacy Principles and does not extend to individuals or most small businesses with annual turnover below $3 million.

If you are unsure who installed the camera, you may still have a claim against the property owner or manager who failed to detect or remove it, provided they acted recklessly. Recklessness in this context means the defendant was aware of a substantial risk that a hidden camera existed and failed to act. A landlord who purchases a property with existing surveillance infrastructure and lets it without inspection may meet this threshold, depending on the circumstances.

State-by-State Criminal Position

The criminal framework varies significantly across Australian states. In Victoria, the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 prohibits the use of an optical surveillance device to observe or record a private activity without consent. Private activity means activity carried on inside a building in circumstances where the parties would reasonably expect privacy. Bathrooms and bedrooms are clearly covered. However, common areas such as living rooms may be less clear-cut, depending on the facts.

In New South Wales, the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 prohibits the installation, use, or maintenance of an optical surveillance device on or within premises to record or observe a private activity without consent, where there is entry onto premises or interference with property without consent. Penalties for individuals include up to five years imprisonment or a fine of 100 penalty units ($11,000), while corporations face fines of 500 penalty units ($55,000). These penalty amounts are subject to indexing.

In Queensland, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 covers only listening devices. There is no criminal offence for covert optical surveillance in the civilian context. This is a significant gap in state privacy law. The Commonwealth statutory tort now fills this gap, providing Queensland tenants and guests with a civil remedy that did not previously exist.

What Evidence Should You Preserve?

Evidence preservation is critical. If you discover a hidden camera, take clear photographs of the device and its location before anything is moved. Note the date and time of discovery. If you can identify the make and model of the device, record it. Do not destroy the device or attempt to access its storage, as this may compromise evidence for both criminal and civil proceedings. If you believe the device is transmitting wirelessly, take screenshots of any connected networks or applications. Report the discovery to police as soon as practicable, and obtain a report number.

Damages and Remedies

The statutory tort does not require proof of financial loss. Damages are awarded for the invasion itself. The court may award compensatory damages for distress, anxiety, humiliation, and loss of dignity, up to the cap of approximately $478,550 for non-economic loss. In cases where the defendant's conduct was deliberate, sustained, or calculated to exploit the plaintiff, exemplary damages may also be available. The court can order injunctions, delivery up or destruction of recordings, and an account of profits derived from the recordings. Where the same conduct gives rise to a claim in defamation (for example, if recordings were published), related claims may be pursued concurrently. For more on the intersection with defamation law, see defamationlawyer.au.

The OAIC Complaint Pathway

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) accepts complaints about privacy breaches, and this pathway is free and does not require a lawyer. However, it only covers APP entities, which means it does not apply to individual landlords or small businesses with annual turnover below $3 million (unless they trade in personal information). Most individual Airbnb hosts and small landlords fall outside the OAIC's jurisdiction. Even where the OAIC can act, outcomes are typically modest and the process is slow. For serious hidden camera cases, the statutory tort provides a materially stronger remedy. For a detailed comparison, see our page on OAIC complaints versus court proceedings.

Confidential Initial Assessment: $770 Fixed Fee

Bring what you have. We will assess whether you have an actionable claim under the statutory tort and advise on the criminal complaint process in your state.

Why the Statutory Tort Matters for Hidden Camera Cases

The new law addresses gaps that previously left tenants and guests without a civil remedy.

No Proof of Damage Required

The statutory tort is actionable per se. You do not need to prove financial loss, psychological diagnosis, or any specific harm. The invasion itself is the wrong.

Truth Is Not a Defence

Unlike defamation, a defendant cannot escape liability by arguing that the recordings were accurate or depicted real events. The invasion of privacy is the actionable conduct, not the content of the recording.

Claim Against Any Defendant

The tort applies to individuals, corporations, and government bodies. You are not limited to APP entities. Individual landlords and small Airbnb operators are within scope.

Dual-Track Approach

A civil claim under the statutory tort and a criminal complaint under state surveillance legislation can proceed simultaneously. A criminal investigation may also produce evidence useful to your civil claim.

Injunctions to Stop Ongoing Surveillance

The court can order the defendant to cease surveillance, destroy recordings, and refrain from distributing any material. This is particularly important where recordings may be shared or sold.

Fills the Queensland Gap

Queensland has no criminal offence for covert optical surveillance of civilians. The Commonwealth statutory tort now provides Queensland tenants with a civil remedy for hidden camera surveillance that state law does not cover.

Frequently Asked Questions: Hidden Cameras in Rental Properties

Yes, in most circumstances. Since 10 June 2025, the statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy under Schedule 2 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) provides individuals with a civil cause of action for intrusion upon seclusion. A hidden camera in a bathroom, bedroom, or other private area of an Airbnb is a clear example of this kind of intrusion. You can bring a claim against the host personally, and potentially against a property management company or the corporate entity that operates the listing. You do not need to prove you suffered financial loss. The limitation period is one year from when you became aware of the invasion, or three years from when it occurred, whichever is earlier.

In most Australian states, yes. In Victoria, the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 prohibits optical surveillance of a private activity without consent. In NSW, the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 carries penalties of up to five years imprisonment for unauthorised optical surveillance involving entry onto premises or interference with property. In Queensland, there is no general criminal offence for covert optical surveillance in the civilian context. State surveillance legislation creates criminal offences, not civil remedies. You cannot sue under the Surveillance Devices Act. The civil remedy is provided by the Commonwealth statutory tort.

Photograph the device and its location immediately. Note the date, time, and circumstances of discovery. Do not remove, destroy, or tamper with the device, as it is evidence. If you believe the device is transmitting, note any visible network names or indicator lights. Report the discovery to police and obtain a report number. Then contact a privacy solicitor to assess whether you have an actionable claim under the statutory tort. Time limits apply: you may have as little as 12 months to commence proceedings.

Potentially. The statutory tort requires the defendant to have acted intentionally or recklessly. If a property manager was aware of a substantial risk that a hidden camera existed in the property and failed to act, that may constitute recklessness. Negligence alone, meaning a failure to notice the camera through ordinary carelessness, is not sufficient to establish liability under the statutory tort. The facts will matter. A property manager who inherited a property with known surveillance infrastructure and failed to remove it is in a different position to one who had no reason to suspect a device was present.

The statutory tort allows the court to award compensatory damages for non-economic loss (distress, humiliation, anxiety, loss of dignity) up to a cap of approximately $478,550. Exemplary damages may be awarded in exceptional cases involving deliberate or calculated conduct. The court can also order injunctions, delivery up or destruction of recordings, and an account of profits. No proof of financial loss is required. For more detail, see our page on compensation and damages claims.

The OAIC complaint pathway is free, does not require a lawyer, and may be appropriate for less serious matters involving APP entities. However, most individual landlords and small Airbnb hosts are not APP entities and fall outside the OAIC's jurisdiction. Even where the OAIC can act, it cannot award damages equivalent to those available under the statutory tort, and the process is typically slower. For serious hidden camera cases, the statutory tort provides a stronger remedy. You can read a detailed comparison on our page about OAIC complaints versus court proceedings.

The statutory tort provides several defences under Part 2 of Schedule 2. A landlord might argue consent (if the tenant was informed of the camera and agreed), lawful authority (if the surveillance was authorised by law or a court order), or necessity (if the camera was installed in response to a genuine threat to safety or property). The court also applies a seriousness threshold: not every invasion of privacy is actionable. However, a covert camera in a bathroom or bedroom of a rental property will, in most circumstances, be very difficult to defend. Separately, certain exemptions under Part 3 of Schedule 2 (such as law enforcement and intelligence agency exemptions) can be determined before trial on application by the defendant.

Take the allegation seriously. If you did not install the camera, gather evidence that establishes this, including purchase records for the property, inspection reports, and any communications with previous owners or property managers. If the camera was installed by a previous owner and you were not aware of it, you may have a defence on the basis that your conduct was not intentional or reckless. You should also consider whether any exemptions under Part 3 of Schedule 2 apply. If you have been served with court documents, respond within the timeframe specified. We act for both plaintiffs and defendants in statutory tort proceedings. Contact us for a confidential initial assessment.

Time Limits Apply. You May Have as Little as 12 Months to Act.

If you have discovered a hidden camera in a rental property, Airbnb, or short-stay accommodation, contact us for a confidential assessment of your options under the statutory tort and state criminal law.

Disclaimer: This content provides general information only and does not constitute specific legal advice. You should seek independent legal advice regarding your particular circumstances.

Call