Charged With Assault in Western Australia? When Can You Claim Self-Defence?

September 29th, 2026

Imagine being confronted by someone who becomes aggressive. You believe you are about to be attacked, so you push them away or strike them to protect yourself.

The police subsequently become involved, and you find yourself charged with assault.

You may be asking a very reasonable question: How can I be charged with assault when I was only defending myself?

In Western Australia, the law recognises that a person may be justified in using force to protect themselves or another person.

However, self-defence is not automatically established simply because the other person was aggressive or initiated the confrontation.

The circumstances of the incident, the accused person’s beliefs and the reasonableness of their response can all become important.

What is self-defence under Western Australian law?

Section 248 of the Criminal Code (WA) provides for the defence of self-defence in relation to relevant offences against the person.

In broad terms, the defence requires consideration of three matters:

1. Whether the accused believed their actions were necessary to defend themselves or another person.

2. Whether their actions were a reasonable response in the circumstances as they believed them to be.

3. Whether there were reasonable grounds for the relevant beliefs.

The statutory defence also includes circumstances in which the anticipated harmful act is not imminent.

This means that self-defence involves more than simply asking whether a person felt threatened.

The court must examine the circumstances and determine whether the legal requirements are satisfied.

Does the other person have to strike first?

A common misconception is that a person must wait until they have actually been struck before they can defend themselves.

That is not necessarily correct.

For example, imagine someone advancing aggressively towards another person while threatening to seriously injure them.

Depending on the surrounding circumstances, the person being threatened may genuinely believe that defensive action is necessary.

The law does not invariably require someone to wait until they have already been injured.

However, the belief that defensive action is necessary must have reasonable grounds, and the response must satisfy the statutory requirements.

A mere verbal disagreement, without more, will not necessarily justify the use of physical force.

How much force can you use to defend yourself?

One of the central issues in a self-defence case is whether the force used was a reasonable response in the circumstances as the accused believed them to be.

Consider two examples.

Example 1: A person is pushed during an argument.

The person pushes the aggressor away to create distance and protect themselves.

Depending on the circumstances, that response may be capable of being justified as self-defence.

Example 2: A person is pushed during an argument.

The person responds by repeatedly striking the aggressor after the immediate danger has passed.

The circumstances may raise questions about whether the response was reasonable or whether the conduct had moved beyond self-defence.

These examples are illustrations only. The actual legal assessment depends upon the evidence and the statutory requirements.

The important distinction is that self-defence concerns protection from harm, rather than retaliation or punishment.

Can you claim self-defence if you were involved in the argument?

Yes, potentially.

The fact that a person participated in an argument does not, by itself, determine whether self-defence is available.

The court may need to examine how the confrontation developed, what each person did and what the accused reasonably believed was happening.

For example, an argument may begin verbally before one person threatens or attempts serious physical violence.

The actions of both parties can become relevant to understanding what occurred.

Importantly, the question is not simply who started the argument.

The legal requirements of self-defence must be considered in light of the entire incident.

What evidence can be important in an assault case?

Assault allegations frequently arise from incidents that occur quickly and involve conflicting accounts.

One person may allege that they were attacked without provocation. The accused may maintain that they were acting defensively.

In such circumstances, the available evidence can become particularly important.

Depending on the case, that evidence may include:

• CCTV or other video recordings.

• Police body-worn camera footage.

• Photographs of injuries.

• Medical records.

• Statements from independent witnesses.

• Text messages or communications before or after the incident.

• The recorded police interview.

• Evidence concerning the physical circumstances of the confrontation.

For example, CCTV may assist in identifying who approached whom, the sequence of physical contact and whether an alleged threat continued.

Medical evidence may assist in establishing the nature and extent of injuries. However, the existence of an injury does not, by itself, resolve whether the accused acted in self-defence.

The evidence must be considered as a whole.

What if both people were injured?

It is not unusual for both participants in a physical confrontation to sustain injuries.

In those circumstances, the presence of injuries on both people does not automatically establish who was responsible for an unlawful assault.

The injuries may be relevant to reconstructing the events, but other evidence will often be necessary.

The court may need to consider the sequence of events, the nature of the injuries and the reliability of the competing accounts.

The fact that someone suffered a more serious injury does not necessarily establish that the other person was the aggressor.

Equally, sustaining an injury does not automatically establish that a person acted lawfully in self-defence.

What should you do if you have been charged with assault?

If you have been charged with assault and believe you were defending yourself, it is important to obtain legal advice before making significant decisions about the proceedings.

Depending on the circumstances, the appropriate preparation may include obtaining the prosecution evidence, reviewing available footage, identifying relevant witnesses and considering whether the statutory defence applies.

The precise charge is also important.

Western Australian criminal law distinguishes between different assault offences, including common assault and assault occasioning bodily harm. The circumstances and consequences of those charges can differ.

A person should understand the elements of the particular offence alleged and any available defence before deciding how to proceed.

Criminal defence representation in Perth

Being charged with assault does not mean that the prosecution’s allegations have been proved.

Where self-defence is raised, a proper examination of the evidence and the applicable law may be central to the defence.

At Bloxham Legal, Craig Bloxham provides criminal law representation throughout Western Australia, including defended hearings, trials, bail applications and sentencing proceedings.

With more than 20 years of legal experience, Craig has appeared in the Magistrates Court, District Court and Supreme Court of Western Australia.

If you have been charged with assault, obtaining advice directed to your particular circumstances can help you understand your legal position and the options available.

Contact Bloxham Legal

Telephone: 0417 994 468

Email: info@bloxhamlegal.com.au

Website: www.bloxhamlegal.com.au

About the Author

Craig Clifford Bloxham — Barrister & Solicitor

Craig Bloxham is the principal of Bloxham Legal.

Admitted to legal practice in 2004, Craig has more than 20 years of experience providing legal advice and court representation in Western Australia.

His experience includes appearing in the Magistrates Court, District Court and Supreme Court, including criminal trials, bail applications and sentencing proceedings.

His academic and professional qualifications include:

• Bachelor of Laws (LLB).

• Master of Business Administration (MBA).

• Graduate Diploma in Management.

• Graduate Diploma in Psychotherapy.

• Graduate Diploma in Family Dispute Resolution.

• Nationally Accredited Mediator.

His professional background encompasses criminal advocacy, mediation, counselling and dispute resolution.

Legal Disclaimer

This article provides general information about criminal law in Western Australia as at September 2026.

It is not intended to constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for obtaining independent legal advice concerning your individual circumstances.

The availability of self-defence depends upon the particular facts, the applicable law and the evidence in each case. Nothing in this article constitutes a representation or guarantee concerning the outcome of any criminal proceedings.

Readers should seek advice from a suitably qualified legal practitioner before making decisions concerning a criminal charge or court proceedings.