diff --git a/CHANGELOG.txt b/CHANGELOG.txt
index 0f001c1f76..f399c22696 100644
--- a/CHANGELOG.txt
+++ b/CHANGELOG.txt
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ Changelog
  * Add oEmbed provider patterns for YouTube Shorts Shorts and YouTube Live URLs (valnuro, Fabien Le Frapper)
  * Add initial implementation of `PagePermissionPolicy` (Sage Abdullah)
  * Refactor `UserPagePermissionsProxy` and `PagePermissionTester` to use `PagePermissionPolicy` (Sage Abdullah)
+ * Add a predictable default ordering of the "Object/Other permissions" in the Group Editing view, allow this ordering to be customised (Daniel Kirkham)
  * Fix: Prevent choosers from failing when initial value is an unrecognised ID, e.g. when moving a page from a location where `parent_page_types` would disallow it (Dan Braghis)
  * Fix: Move comment notifications toggle to the comments side panel (Sage Abdullah)
  * Fix: Remove comment button on InlinePanel fields (Sage Abdullah)
diff --git a/docs/extending/customising_group_views.md b/docs/extending/customising_group_views.md
index c3abae4070..3e56d16737 100644
--- a/docs/extending/customising_group_views.md
+++ b/docs/extending/customising_group_views.md
@@ -106,3 +106,29 @@ INSTALLED_APPS = [
     ...,
 ]
 ```
+
+(customising_group_views_permissions_order)=
+
+## Customising the group editor permissions ordering
+
+The order that object types appear in the group editor's "Object permissions" and "Other permissions" sections can be configured by registering that order in one or more `AppConfig` definitions. The order value is typically an integer between 0 and 999, although this is not enforced.
+
+```python
+from django.apps import AppConfig
+
+
+class MyProjectAdminAppConfig(AppConfig):
+    name = "myproject_admin"
+    verbose_name = "My Project Admin"
+
+    def ready(self):
+        from wagtail.users.permission_order import register
+
+        register("gadgets.SprocketType", order=150)
+        register("gadgets.ChainType", order=151)
+        register("site_settings.Settings", order=160)
+```
+
+A model class can also be passed to `register()`.
+
+Any object types that are not explicitly given an order will be sorted in alphabetical order by `app_label` and `model`, and listed after all of the object types _with_ a configured order.
diff --git a/docs/releases/5.1.md b/docs/releases/5.1.md
index a471821509..8f2156a73c 100644
--- a/docs/releases/5.1.md
+++ b/docs/releases/5.1.md
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ FieldPanels can now be marked as read-only with the `read_only=True` keyword arg
  * Add oEmbed provider patterns for YouTube Shorts (e.g. [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/nX84KctJtG0](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/nX84KctJtG0)) and YouTube Live URLs (valnuro, Fabien Le Frapper)
  * Add initial implementation of `PagePermissionPolicy` (Sage Abdullah)
  * Refactor `UserPagePermissionsProxy` and `PagePermissionTester` to use `PagePermissionPolicy` (Sage Abdullah)
+ * Add a predictable default ordering of the "Object/Other permissions" in the Group Editing view, allow this [ordering to be customised](customising_group_views_permissions_order) (Daniel Kirkham)
 
 ### Bug fixes
 
@@ -120,3 +121,10 @@ If you use the `user_page_permissions` context variable or use the `UserPagePerm
 The undocumented `get_pages_with_direct_explore_permission` and `get_explorable_root_page` functions in `wagtail.admin.navigation` are deprecated. They can be replaced with `PagePermissionPolicy().instances_with_direct_explore_permission(user)` and `PagePermissionPolicy().explorable_root_instance(user)`, respectively.
 
 The undocumented `users_with_page_permission` function in `wagtail.admin.auth` is also deprecated. It can be replaced with `PagePermissionPolicy().users_with_permission_for_instance(action, page, include_superusers)`.
+
+### The default ordering of Group Editing Permissions models has changed
+
+The ordering for "Object permissions" and "Other permissions" now follows a predictable order equivalent do Django's default `Model` ordering.
+This will be different to the previous ordering which never intentionally implemented.
+
+This default ordering is now `["content_type__app_label", "content_type__model", "codename"]`, which can now be customised [](customising_group_views_permissions_order).
diff --git a/wagtail/users/permission_order.py b/wagtail/users/permission_order.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..2314deff3f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/wagtail/users/permission_order.py
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+from django.contrib.contenttypes.models import ContentType
+
+from wagtail.coreutils import resolve_model_string
+
+CONTENT_TYPE_ORDER = {}
+
+
+def register(model, **kwargs):
+    """
+    Registers order against the model content_type, used to
+    control the order the models and its permissions appear
+    in the groups object permission editor
+    """
+    order = kwargs.pop("order", None)
+    if order is not None:
+        content_type = ContentType.objects.get_for_model(resolve_model_string(model))
+        CONTENT_TYPE_ORDER[content_type.id] = order
diff --git a/wagtail/users/templatetags/wagtailusers_tags.py b/wagtail/users/templatetags/wagtailusers_tags.py
index 34b3f411a2..c188425ad0 100644
--- a/wagtail/users/templatetags/wagtailusers_tags.py
+++ b/wagtail/users/templatetags/wagtailusers_tags.py
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ import re
 from django import template
 
 from wagtail import hooks
+from wagtail.users.permission_order import CONTENT_TYPE_ORDER
 
 register = template.Library()
 
@@ -38,8 +39,13 @@ def format_permissions(permission_bound_field):
 
     """
     permissions = permission_bound_field.field._queryset
-    # get a distinct list of the content types that these permissions relate to
-    content_type_ids = set(permissions.values_list("content_type_id", flat=True))
+    # get a distinct and ordered list of the content types that these permissions relate to.
+    # relies on Permission model default ordering, dict.fromkeys() retaining that order
+    # from the queryset, and the stability of sorted().
+    content_type_ids = sorted(
+        dict.fromkeys(permissions.values_list("content_type_id", flat=True)),
+        key=lambda ct: CONTENT_TYPE_ORDER.get(ct, float("inf")),
+    )
 
     # iterate over permission_bound_field to build a lookup of individual renderable
     # checkbox objects

diff --git a/wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py b/wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py
index d34b3fff86..37b7502212 100644
--- a/wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py
+++ b/wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ from wagtail.models import (
 from wagtail.test.utils import WagtailTestUtils
 from wagtail.users.forms import UserCreationForm, UserEditForm
 from wagtail.users.models import UserProfile
+from wagtail.users.permission_order import register as register_permission_order
 from wagtail.users.views.groups import GroupViewSet
 from wagtail.users.views.users import get_user_creation_form, get_user_edit_form
 from wagtail.users.wagtail_hooks import get_group_viewset_cls
@@ -1947,6 +1948,71 @@ class TestGroupEditView(WagtailTestUtils, TestCase):
         # Should not show inputs for publish permissions on models without DraftStateMixin
         self.assertNotInHTML("Can publish advert", html)
 
+    def test_group_edit_loads_with_django_permissions_in_order(self):
+        # ensure objects are ordered as registered, followed by the default ordering
+
+        def object_position(object_perms):
+            # returns the list of objects in the object permsissions
+            # as provided by the format_permissions tag
+
+            def flatten(perm_set):
+                # iterates through perm_set dict, flattens the list if present
+                for v in perm_set.values():
+                    if isinstance(v, list):
+                        for e in v:
+                            yield e
+                    else:
+                        yield v
+
+            return [
+                (
+                    perm.content_type.app_label,
+                    perm.content_type.model,
+                )
+                for perm_set in object_perms
+                for perm in [next(v for v in flatten(perm_set) if "perm" in v)["perm"]]
+            ]
+
+        # Set order on two objects, should appear first and second
+        register_permission_order("snippetstests.fancysnippet", order=100)
+        register_permission_order("snippetstests.standardsnippet", order=110)
+
+        response = self.get()
+        object_positions = object_position(response.context["object_perms"])
+        self.assertEqual(
+            object_positions[0],
+            ("snippetstests", "fancysnippet"),
+            msg="Configured object permission order is incorrect",
+        )
+        self.assertEqual(
+            object_positions[1],
+            ("snippetstests", "standardsnippet"),
+            msg="Configured object permission order is incorrect",
+        )
+
+        # Swap order of the objects
+        register_permission_order("snippetstests.standardsnippet", order=90)
+        response = self.get()
+        object_positions = object_position(response.context["object_perms"])
+
+        self.assertEqual(
+            object_positions[0],
+            ("snippetstests", "standardsnippet"),
+            msg="Configured object permission order is incorrect",
+        )
+        self.assertEqual(
+            object_positions[1],
+            ("snippetstests", "fancysnippet"),
+            msg="Configured object permission order is incorrect",
+        )
+
+        # Test remainder of objects are sorted
+        self.assertEqual(
+            object_positions[2:],
+            sorted(object_positions[2:]),
+            msg="Default object permission order is incorrect",
+        )
+
 
 class TestGroupViewSet(TestCase):
     def setUp(self):

Order Object Permissions in the Group Editor
### Is your proposal related to a problem?

The Group Editor - at menu->Settings->Groups or /admin/groups/<<int:group>>/ - allows an administrator to control the permissions each member of the group receives. The "Object Permissions" section, which allows add, change, delete and other model permissions to be edited, are listed in an unmanaged order. The order appears to depend on the migration order, and depending on the development and deployment workflow, results in that ordering being different between development, staging and production deployments.

### Describe the solution you'd like

I would like a solution where the developer can control the order in which each Object type appears. Object permissions can then be placed in a logical order, such as placing related objects together. That order will then be consistent between deployments.

The solution should address objects defined by the developer and within Wagtail itself.

### Describe alternatives you've considered

There appears to be no practical solution to this problem.

### Additional context

I've developed a PR that addresses this, which I'll post shortly.
wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestUserFormHelpers::test_get_user_creation_form_with_custom_form wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestUserFormHelpers::test_get_user_creation_form_with_default_form wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestUserFormHelpers::test_get_user_creation_form_with_invalid_form wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestUserFormHelpers::test_get_user_edit_form_with_custom_form wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestUserFormHelpers::test_get_user_edit_form_with_default_form wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestUserFormHelpers::test_get_user_edit_form_with_invalid_form wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestGroupViewSet::test_get_group_viewset_cls wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestGroupViewSet::test_get_group_viewset_cls_custom_form_does_not_exist wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestGroupViewSet::test_get_group_viewset_cls_custom_form_invalid_value wagtail/users/tests/test_admin_views.py::TestGroupViewSet::test_get_group_viewset_cls_with_custom_form