Can you get a restricted licence if you refused a breath or blood test?

The short answer is no. Refusing or failing to provide a breath, blood, or urine sample is an absolute bar to a restricted licence in Tasmania. So is objecting to a blood sample being analysed. If you have been convicted of any of these offences, the court has no power to grant you a restricted licence, regardless of your circumstances.

This page explains which provisions create this bar, what counts as a "refusal" under the legislation, and what options you may have going forward.

Two provisions in section 19(1A) of the Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1970 deal with refusal offences:

• Section 19(1A)(d) — bars a restricted licence where the offender has been convicted of an offence under section 14(5). This covers objecting, without reasonable excuse, to a blood sample being submitted for analysis.
• Section 19(1A)(g) — bars a restricted licence where the offender has been convicted of an offence in respect of a failure to comply with a requirement under section 10(4) or section 10A(1). This covers failing to provide a breath sample, refusing a blood test, or failing to provide a urine sample or oral fluid test.

Both are absolute bars. There are no exceptions, no discretion, and no threshold below which refusal becomes less serious. If either provision applies, the court cannot make a restricted licence order.

The legislation covers various forms of non-compliance with testing requirements, not just an outright refusal. In practical terms, a "refusal" for the purposes of the restricted licence bar includes:

• Failing to provide a breath sample when required under section 10(4)
• Refusing to submit to a blood test or failing to provide a blood or urine sample under section 10A(1)
• Obstructing or failing to cooperate with the testing process
• Objecting to a blood sample being submitted for analysis under section 14(5)

The specific charge on your court paperwork will tell you which section applies. What matters for restricted licence eligibility is whether you were convicted of an offence under one of these provisions.

The rationale behind the refusal bar is straightforward: refusing a test should not be a more favourable outcome than providing a high reading.

If refusal offences were not included as absolute bars, a driver who blew over 0.15 would be excluded from a restricted licence, while a driver who simply refused to blow at all might still be eligible. The legislation closes that gap by treating refusal as being at least as serious as the worst possible reading.

This is also why the bar is absolute. For drink driving, the law draws a line at 0.15 — readings below that threshold leave the door open. For refusal, there is no equivalent line to draw, because the whole point is that no reading exists. The law assumes the worst.

If you have been convicted of a refusal offence, a restricted licence application is not available to you. However, you are not entirely without options:

• Wait out the disqualification period. Your disqualification has a fixed end date. Once it expires, you can apply to have your licence restored in the usual way.
• Explore appeal options. If you believe the conviction itself was wrong — for example, if you had a genuine reason for being unable to provide a sample and this was not properly considered at the hearing of the case — you may be able to appeal the conviction. This is a separate legal process with strict timeframes, and you should speak with a lawyer as soon as possible if you want to pursue this.

It is important to understand the distinction: a restricted licence application cannot fix a refusal conviction. If the conviction stands, the bar applies. The only way to remove the bar is to have the conviction itself overturned on appeal.