FIFO worker’s move-on notice charge finalised at the first court appearance with a small fine and spent conviction
Published May 2026
A night out in Northbridge was almost over when one poor decision, made less than 10 minutes after receiving a police move-on notice, resulted in a criminal charge.
Our client had been directed by police to leave the entertainment precinct in the early hours of the morning. Still affected by alcohol and not fully appreciating that “move on” meant exactly that, he made the mistake of trying to briefly enter another venue on his way out of the area. What he did not realise was that police had followed him on bicycles. He was arrested for failing to obey the move-on order and later released on bail.
A few hours after what had seemed like a routine night out, he was facing a criminal charge and the prospect of having the matter follow him into his employment and future. That was particularly concerning because our client worked FIFO. His first court appearance was listed during a period when he was rostered away for work and could not attend in person. He was anxious to deal with the case as quickly and efficiently as possible. Just as importantly, he wanted to avoid an enduring conviction if that could be achieved.
We identified three immediate objectives. First, we needed to ensure that the Court did not treat his absence from the first appearance as a breach of bail. Second, we wanted to persuade the Magistrate to allow a plea of guilty to be entered on his behalf so that the matter could be dealt with without requiring him to return to Perth unnecessarily. Third, we intended to apply for a spent conviction so that the offence would not continue to affect him long after the case was over.
Preparation began before the first court date.
We gathered character references, flight itineraries, employment contact details and his work roster to demonstrate that his absence was due to legitimate FIFO commitments rather than any disregard for the Court process. We also obtained a letter from our client to the Magistrate in which he expressed remorse for his conduct, accepted responsibility and explained the steps he intended to take to ensure he did not find himself in a similar situation again. All of that material, together with an outline of the applications we intended to make, was provided to the Court in advance.
That preparation meant the Magistrate had a clear picture of both the circumstances of the offending and the practical reasons for our client’s absence before the matter was called. When the case came before the Court, the Magistrate accepted that our client had a reasonable excuse for not appearing in person and did not treat his absence as a breach of bail. The Court also permitted a plea of guilty to be entered on his behalf. Most importantly, the matter was dealt with immediately rather than being adjourned for a further appearance.
We then proceeded with the spent conviction application. The application was successful. Our client received a modest fine and a spent conviction order, allowing the matter to be finalised without an enduring conviction remaining on his record.
The outcome was particularly valuable given his FIFO employment and the practical difficulty that repeated court appearances would have caused. What could easily have become a drawn-out process involving further travel, time away from work and multiple court dates was instead resolved at the first opportunity.
The case also illustrates the importance of preparing carefully even for relatively minor public-order charges. A failure to obey a move-on order may appear straightforward, but the way the matter is presented can still have a significant impact on the outcome, particularly where employment, travel and a client’s future criminal record are concerned.
In this case, early preparation allowed us to deal with the bail issue, secure permission for the plea to be entered in our client’s absence, and obtain a spent conviction at the first court appearance.
For our client, that meant he could return to work and move on from the incident without the charge continuing to follow him.