Combination Sentences (ACT)

By James Stevens, Director and Solicitor, Go To Court Lawyers. Last reviewed 14 April 2026.

A combination sentence is typically a sentence that involves a term of full-time imprisonment as well as one or more other sentencing orders. This approach to sentencing generally aims to help offenders with rehabilitation, which in turn, protects the community in the long term. Although commonly used for this purpose, combination sentences can also be applied to a range of offences in various other ways. This page deals with combination sentences in the ACT.

The ACT criminal justice system recognises that effective sentencing often requires a multifaceted approach that addresses various aspects of an offender's circumstances and the impact of their crimes. Combination sentences provide courts with flexibility to tailor punishments that serve multiple sentencing purposes, including deterrence, rehabilitation, and community protection. These sentences are particularly valuable in cases where a single penalty may not adequately address all relevant factors.

Combination sentences where imprisonment is imposed

Section 29 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 permits a combination sentence to be imposed for an offence that is punishable by imprisonment. A combination sentence for such an offence may comprise two or more of the following elements:

• full-time imprisonment;
• a fine;
• a driver-licence disqualification;
• a reparation order;
• a non-association order;
• a place-restriction order;
• an Intensive Correction Order;
• a suspended sentence;
• a good behaviour order;
• an order imposing another penalty that is available under any other ACT law.

Key considerations for imprisonment-based combination sentences

When imposing combination sentences that include imprisonment, ACT courts must carefully consider the overall effect and proportionality of the combined penalties. The court must ensure that the total sentence reflects the seriousness of the offence while providing appropriate opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration into the community.

The inclusion of multiple sentencing elements allows judges to address different aspects of the offending behaviour. For instance, a reparation order can provide direct compensation to victims, while a good behaviour order can help ensure the offender's conduct remains appropriate after release from custody.

Combination sentences that include good behaviour orders or intensive corrections orders

Under section 29 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005, courts cannot impose a good behaviour order that commences while the offender is serving full-time imprisonment or detention, or while they are on parole.

A court cannot impose an intensive corrections order in conjunction with full-time imprisonment, a suspended sentence or a good behaviour order.

Understanding intensive corrections orders in combination sentences

Intensive Correction Orders (ICOs) represent an alternative to full-time imprisonment that allows offenders to serve their sentence in the community under strict conditions. When ICOs are part of a combination sentence, they cannot be combined with certain other orders due to potential conflicts in their operation and supervision requirements.

The restrictions on combining ICOs with other orders ensure clarity in sentence administration and prevent contradictory requirements that could undermine the effectiveness of the sentencing regime.

Combination sentences where imprisonment is not imposed

Under Section 30 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005, if an offence does not attract a penalty of imprisonment, the sentencing court can impose a sentence that includes a combination of two or more of the following orders:

• A good behaviour order;
• A fine;
• License disqualification;
• Reparation;
• A non-association order;
• A place-restriction order;
• An order imposing a different penalty available under any other ACT law.

Benefits of non-custodial combination sentences

Non-custodial combination sentences provide courts with significant flexibility when dealing with less serious offences or first-time offenders. These sentences can effectively address the underlying causes of criminal behaviour while maintaining the offender's connection to employment, family, and community support systems.

The combination of different non-custodial orders can create a comprehensive framework for addressing specific risk factors and promoting positive behavioural change without the disruptive effects of imprisonment.

Court decides when sentence begins and ends

Under Section 31 of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005, a court has the discretion to determine when any part of a combination sentence, or any order included in the sentence, will begin or end. This decision may be based on any factor the court deems appropriate, such as:

• A specified date
• The expiration of a particular timeframe
• The occurrence of a particular event, or the earlier or later of two or more designated events.

Timing considerations in combination sentences

The ability to stagger the commencement and conclusion of different elements within a combination sentence allows courts to create a logical progression that supports the offender's rehabilitation journey. For example, a court might order that a good behaviour order commence upon the offender's release from custody, ensuring continuous supervision and support.

This flexibility also enables courts to coordinate combination sentences with other obligations or circumstances in the offender's life, such as completion of treatment programs or resolution of related civil matters.

Judicial discretion and sentencing principles

ACT courts exercise considerable discretion when crafting combination sentences, guided by established sentencing principles outlined in the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005. Judges must balance competing considerations including punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, and community protection when determining the appropriate combination of penalties.

The court's decision-making process involves careful assessment of factors such as the offender's criminal history, personal circumstances, the nature and seriousness of the offence, and the impact on victims and the broader community. This holistic approach ensures that combination sentences are tailored to achieve the most appropriate outcomes for all stakeholders.

Proportionality in combination sentencing

A fundamental principle governing combination sentences is proportionality – ensuring that the total penalty is appropriate to the gravity of the offending and the offender's culpability. Courts must guard against imposing combination sentences that, when viewed cumulatively, are excessive or unduly harsh.

Legal representation and combination sentences

Given the complexity of combination sentences and their potential long-term implications, obtaining experienced legal representation is crucial for anyone facing criminal charges in the ACT. Skilled criminal lawyers can effectively advocate for the most appropriate combination of penalties, taking into account their client's specific circumstances and the nuances of ACT sentencing law.

Legal practitioners play a vital role in presenting mitigating factors, proposing realistic sentencing alternatives, and ensuring that any combination sentence imposed is legally sound and practically workable. They can also provide valuable guidance on compliance requirements and the consequences of breaching different components of a combination sentence.

Preparing for combination sentence hearings

Preparation for sentencing hearings involving potential combination sentences requires thorough documentation of the offender's circumstances, including employment history, family responsibilities, health issues, and