03 9070 9810

Privacy Lawyer Melbourne

Melbourne CBD solicitors acting on the statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy. Federal Court and Supreme Court.

Book a Confidential Assessment

Max file size: 20MB

Melbourne-Based Invasion of Privacy Solicitors

Sutton Laurence King Lawyers is a Melbourne CBD firm acting for individuals who have suffered a serious invasion of privacy. Since 10 June 2025, Australian law has provided a statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy under Schedule 2 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). This is a federal cause of action. It gives individuals the right to claim civil privacy damages against any person, corporation, or government body.

Our office is located in Melbourne's legal precinct, minutes from the Federal Court of Australia (Melbourne Registry) and the Supreme Court of Victoria. For urgent matters, including applications for privacy injunctions to restrain ongoing surveillance or prevent the publication of private information, physical proximity to the courts matters. We are available for same-day consultations and can prepare urgent applications at short notice.

If you are searching for an invasion of privacy lawyer in Melbourne, the critical question is whether what has happened to you meets the legal threshold. Not every unwanted intrusion is actionable. The tort requires the invasion to be serious, and the defendant's conduct must have been intentional or reckless. We offer a fixed-fee confidential initial assessment ($770) to determine whether you have a viable claim and what steps to take next.

The clock is ticking. You may have as little as 12 months from becoming aware of the invasion to commence proceedings.

Serious Privacy Invasion? Speak to a Melbourne Solicitor.

Fixed-fee initial assessment: $770. We will tell you where you stand.

How We Act for Melbourne Clients

Fixed-fee entry points. Urgent availability. Federal jurisdiction, national reach.

Urgent legal preparation for privacy injunction applications

Urgent Privacy Injunctions

When private images are about to be published, surveillance is ongoing, or personal information is being disseminated, the priority is stopping it. We prepare and file urgent injunction applications in the Federal Court (Melbourne Registry) or the Supreme Court of Victoria. Our Melbourne CBD location allows us to act on short notice when time is critical. The court must consider the public interest in publication before granting an injunction, so the application must be properly framed from the outset.

Fixed-fee legal consultation in Melbourne office

Confidential Initial Assessments

Most people who contact us do not know whether they have a viable claim. Many do not know the statutory tort exists. A confidential initial assessment is a fixed-fee ($770) consultation where we review the facts, identify the legal pathway, and advise on prospects. This is not a generic intake call. It is a substantive legal assessment conducted by a solicitor with direct knowledge of the statutory tort, its defences, and the relevant state surveillance legislation. You will leave with a clear understanding of your options.

Federal Court Melbourne courtroom for privacy damages claims

Damages Claims and Court Representation

The statutory tort allows individuals to claim compensation for serious invasions of privacy. Non-economic loss (distress, humiliation, loss of dignity) is capped at approximately $478,550, and no proof of financial loss is required. In exceptional cases, exemplary damages may also be awarded. We represent plaintiffs through the full litigation process: pre-action correspondence, filing, interlocutory applications, mediation, and trial. Claims are brought in the Federal Court or the Federal Circuit and Family Court.

What the Statutory Tort Covers: Melbourne Context

Two Pathways to a Claim

The statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy under Schedule 2 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) covers two distinct forms of conduct.

The first is intrusion upon seclusion: physical or electronic intrusion into a person's private activities, space, or affairs. This includes covert surveillance, hidden cameras, tracking someone's location, accessing private accounts, and eavesdropping. If your neighbour has directed a CCTV camera at your backyard, if an ex-partner is accessing your email or bank accounts, or if someone has placed a tracker on your vehicle, you may have a claim under this pathway.

The second is misuse of personal information: the collection, use, or disclosure of private information in circumstances where a person had a reasonable expectation of privacy. This covers doxxing (publishing someone's home address or phone number), disclosure of medical records, publication of financial information, and non-consensual sharing of intimate images. Truth is not a defence. The information does not need to be false for the claim to succeed.

Why Victoria's Surveillance Laws Leave Gaps

Melbourne residents are often surprised to learn how little protection Victorian law provides against common forms of surveillance. Under the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 (Vic), the offence of optical surveillance does not apply to activities carried on outside a building. This means a neighbour who points a camera at your backyard, your driveway, or your pool area is not committing a criminal offence under Victorian law. There is no civil remedy under that Act either, as state surveillance legislation creates criminal offences, not rights of action for individuals.

The Commonwealth statutory tort fills this gap directly. It provides a civil remedy for neighbour surveillance and for many other forms of intrusion that Victorian law does not address. This is the first time Melbourne residents have had a meaningful legal avenue for these claims.

The Seriousness Threshold

Not every privacy intrusion gives rise to a claim. The court must be satisfied that the invasion was serious, having regard to the nature and consequences of the invasion, whether the defendant knew or ought to have known the conduct was likely to offend or distress the plaintiff, and the broader circumstances. A single instance of a neighbour's camera incidentally capturing a small portion of your front fence is unlikely to meet the threshold. Sustained, deliberate surveillance of private areas of your property is a different matter. We assess seriousness rigorously at the outset so you understand your prospects before committing to proceedings.

Overlap with Defamation

Where private information has been published and that publication also damages your reputation, you may have both a privacy claim and a defamation claim. The two causes of action have different elements, different defences, and different remedies. Notably, truth is a complete defence to defamation but not to the privacy tort. Our firm practises in both areas. For defamation matters, further information is available at defamationlawyer.au.

The OAIC Complaint Alternative

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) accepts complaints about privacy breaches at no cost, and you do not need a lawyer. However, the OAIC complaint pathway only applies to APP entities (organisations and agencies covered by the Australian Privacy Principles). It does not cover individuals, small businesses with less than $3 million in annual turnover, or most private conduct. The statutory tort is a separate regime that applies to any defendant, including individuals and small businesses. For serious invasions where the OAIC pathway is unavailable or inadequate, the statutory tort is the stronger avenue.

This page provides general information about the law. It is not legal advice. Your circumstances may differ. Contact us for advice about your specific situation.

Melbourne CBD. Minutes from the Federal Court.

Same-day consultations available for urgent privacy matters. Contact our office directly.

Why Melbourne Clients Instruct SLK Lawyers

Practical advantages of a Melbourne-based firm acting on the statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy.

Melbourne CBD Location

Our office is in Melbourne's legal precinct, within walking distance of the Federal Court of Australia (Melbourne Registry) and the Supreme Court of Victoria. For urgent injunction applications, proximity matters.

Fixed-Fee Entry Points

Confidential initial assessment: $770. Pre-action demand letter: $990. You know the cost before you commit. No obligation to proceed beyond any fixed-fee stage.

Urgent Availability

Privacy invasions do not wait for business hours. We accept urgent instructions for injunction applications to restrain ongoing surveillance or prevent imminent publication of private information.

Privacy and Defamation Practice

The statutory tort borrows heavily from defamation law, including its defences, damages cap, and publication framework. Our established defamation practice provides direct, relevant knowledge of these overlapping areas.

Plaintiffs and Defendants

We act for both sides. If you are facing a claim or an injunction application, we assist with defence strategy, statutory defences, pre-trial exemption applications, and settlement.

Discretion as Standard

Privacy matters are inherently sensitive. All initial assessments and instructions are treated as strictly confidential. We do not publicise client matters or outcomes without express consent.

Common Questions from Melbourne Clients

Yes. On 10 June 2025, the statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy commenced under Schedule 2 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). For the first time, individuals in Australia have a general civil right of action for serious, intentional or reckless invasions of their privacy. This is a federal cause of action available to individuals across Australia, including Melbourne. It covers both intrusion upon seclusion (surveillance, tracking, hidden cameras) and misuse of personal information (doxxing, publishing private health or financial records, sharing intimate images without consent). For a full explanation, see our page on the new invasion of privacy law.

Under Victorian law, the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 (Vic) does not make it an offence to conduct optical surveillance of activities outside a building. This means your neighbour is unlikely to be committing a criminal offence. However, the Commonwealth statutory tort now provides a civil remedy for this exact scenario. If the surveillance is deliberate or reckless and amounts to a serious intrusion upon your seclusion, you may have a claim. The key issues are whether the camera is directed at areas where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, how long the surveillance has continued, and whether the intrusion is serious enough to meet the statutory threshold. We assess these factors in our confidential initial assessment.

No. The statutory tort is actionable per se, meaning no proof of damage is required. You do not need to show financial loss, medical treatment, or any other quantifiable harm. The court can award damages for non-economic loss including distress, humiliation, and loss of dignity. That said, the invasion must still be serious. The absence of a damage requirement does not mean trivial or incidental privacy intrusions are actionable.

The limitation period is strict: one year from when you became aware (or ought reasonably to have become aware) of the invasion, or three years from when the invasion occurred, whichever expires first. A court may extend the period up to a maximum of six years from the date of the invasion if it considers it just and reasonable to do so. Do not delay in obtaining legal advice. The 12-month awareness period can pass quickly. See our detailed page on privacy tort time limits for further information.

Yes. Truth is not a defence to the statutory tort. This is one of the most significant differences between the privacy tort and defamation law. In a defamation claim, a defendant can defeat the claim by proving the published material was substantially true. Under the privacy tort, the truth of the information is irrelevant. What matters is whether you had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information and whether the invasion was serious. If your private medical records, financial information, or intimate images were disclosed without your consent, the accuracy of those records does not assist the defendant.

Where private information has been published and that publication also damages your reputation, you may have both a privacy tort claim and a defamation claim. The two causes of action have different elements, limitation periods, and defences. They can be brought together or separately depending on the circumstances. Our firm practises in both areas. For defamation matters, see defamationlawyer.au. We can advise on the interaction between the two claims during your initial assessment.

Yes. We act for defendants as well as plaintiffs. Defence options include raising statutory defences at trial (lawful authority, consent, necessity, defence of persons or property, defamation-related defences) and applying for pre-trial determination of exemptions under Part 3 of Schedule 2, which may resolve the matter without going to trial. If you have been served with an urgent injunction application, contact us immediately. Time limits for responding to injunction applications are short.

The statutory tort is a federal cause of action, and claims can be brought in any registry of the Federal Court. However, for urgent matters, including injunction applications that may need to be filed and heard within hours or days, having your solicitor in the same city as the court registry is a practical advantage. Our office is in Melbourne CBD, minutes from the Federal Court of Australia (Melbourne Registry) and the Supreme Court of Victoria. We can attend directions hearings, duty lists, and urgent applications without delay.

You May Have as Little as 12 Months to Act.

Limitation periods under the statutory tort are strict. If you believe your privacy has been seriously invaded, obtain legal advice promptly.

Call