Plaintiff Awarded $93,000 in Damages Following Unlawful Strip Search by NSW Police

Meredith v State of New South Wales (No 5) [2025] NSWSC 1133

On 30 September 2025, the Supreme Court of New South Wales delivered a landmark judgment against NSW Police, for unlawful strip searches conducted by police officers.

This judgment marks a reconsideration of the balance between the exercise of police powers in conducting strip searches, and safeguards in protecting individual freedoms and civil liberties, particularly from a personal injury perspective.  

Statutory Framework

The Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) (‘LEPRA’) is the primary piece of legislation that governs the exercise of police powers in New South Wales.

Section 31 of LEPRA provides that a police officer may carry out a strip search of a person if:

• The police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the strip search is necessary for the purposes of the search, and that the seriousness and urgency of the circumstances make the strip search necessary.

Further, sections 32 and 33 of LEPRA provide that police officers must ensure the preservation of the privacy and dignity of the individual during the search, as well as, adhering to the rules of conduct for strip searches.

Background

The class action was brough by lead Plaintiff, Raya Meredith, on behalf of all people unlawfully strip searched at music festivals in New South Wales between July 2016 and July 2022.

On 20 July 2018, the Plaintiff was strip searched by Police whilst in attendance at the Splendour in the Grass music festival at North Byron Parklands.

A drug detection dog sniffed in the Plaintiff’s direction, and she was then separated from her group of friends and partner, and was directed to a makeshift search area. A “person search” was conducted, by way of a pat down, however, the Plaintiff was then directed by the female officer to remove all articles of clothing for a strip search. The Plaintiff was then directed by the female officer to remove her tampon.

The Plaintiff was subsequently searched in compromising positions, including a search of her body cavities. It was also noted that whilst the search took place, a male officer had entered the area, without warning, and was able to see the nude Plaintiff.

According to NSW Police, the strip search was conducted on the basis of a “reasonable suspicion” that the Plaintiff was in possession of a prohibited plant or drug. Following the strip search, it was confirmed that the Plaintiff was not in possession of any drugs. During the proceedings, Police also conceded that the strip search was conducted on an unlawful basis, as the Plaintiff’s privacy, dignity and bodily integrity were harmed.

Court Proceedings

The Plaintiff commenced proceedings for the intentional torts of battery, assault and false imprisonment. In addition, aggravated damages were sought in relation to the humiliation experienced by the Plaintiff, as a result of the gravity of the police officers’ unlawful and unreasonable conduct.

Allegations

In the Court proceedings, the Plaintiff alleged the following:

1. She was completely deprived of her liberty for a period of approximately 30 minutes whilst being strip searched by police, and therefore, falsely imprisoned.
2. The unlawful pat down body search constituted battery.
3. Assault was committed by the officers, due to the following circumstances:
   1. Being forced to remove articles of clothing,
   2. Being subject to an inspection of her body cavities,
   3. Being forced to bend over in compromising positions,
   4. The male police officer entering the makeshift area whilst partially bent over,
   5. Being forced to re-dress herself in front of the female officer; and
   6. Having her bag removed from her possession and taken out of her sight.

In light of the above, the Plaintiff sought to claim compensatory damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages, as opposed to personal injury damages within the meaning of Part 2 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) (‘CLA’).

The Plaintiff did not make a claim for damages in relation to a ‘personal injury’, as she did not plead that she had sustained a physical injury or mental harm, pursuant to Part 2 of the CLA. Rather, the Plaintiff argued that she suffered from embarrassment, humiliation, fear and distress.

Decision

Justice Dina Yehia of the Supreme Court delivered judgment on 30 September 2025.

The primary issue for determination by the Court was whether the strip search conducted by Police was lawfully authorised pursuant to section 31 of LEPRA.

Ultimately, the Court determined that the strip search conducted by Police was unlawful and there were no reasonable grounds to suspect that the Plaintiff was in possession of an illicit substance.

Justice Yehia provided the following reasons for her decision:

1. The circumstances in which the Plaintiff was unlawfully detained involved a flagrant disregard for her rights, which resulted in “significant harm” to her privacy, liberty and bodily integrity.
2. The officer’s conduct in directing the Plaintiff to move her body and body parts, including a direction to remove her tampon, in the absence of lawful justification, was egregious.
3. The power conferred on police officers to conduct strip searches must be exercised having regard to the stringent legal requirements and safeguards provided by the LEPRA
4. The police officers’ failure to comply with those requirements renders the search unlawful and constitutes an assault, battery, or false imprisonment.

Ultimately, the Plaintiff was awarded $93,000.00 in damages, which included $43,000.00 in compensation and $50,000.00 in aggravated damages. Judgment was also made regarding the Plaintiff’s entitlement to exemplary damages, however, this figure had not yet been determined.

Takeaways

This decision is a key reminder that whilst legislation often confers significant powers to Police and other government entities, these powers must be carefully exercised with reference to individual circumstances.

Written by Amelia Palazzo

Law Clerk

📞 Call us: 02 4626 5077
📍 Visit us: See our locations

The contents of this publication are for reference purposes only. This publication does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Specific legal advice should always be sought separately before taking any action based on this publication.