Court Decisions
Intervention Orders
At Intervention Orders we have direct dealings.
Case studies from our clientele
Supreme Court of Victoria
(1) Mr C.I
Victoria Police had applied for a Family ViolenceIntervention Order (FVIO) against the Respondent. The Respondent was subject toa full no contact interim order which excluded them from the matrimonial home.
When the Respondent first contacted our office, they wereextremely distressed and fearful that they would not be allowed to return homefor the foreseeable future and that, deprived of the ability to communicatewith their spouse by any means, their marriage would not be able to recover.
Following lengthy negotiation with VictoriaPolice, we were able to settle the matter on the first day of Court. TheRespondent consented without admission to a safe contact order (a proposalsupported by their spouse and initially resisted by Police), which allowed theRespondent to return home.
Client 2 (1) Mrs P.W
NSW Police had applied for an Apprehended Domestic ViolenceOrder (ADVO) against the Respondent and subsequently charged the Respondentwith multiple assault charges following the same alleged incident.
Both the intervention order and criminal charges werecontested by the Respondent on the grounds of self-defence.
The Respondent was found not guilty of allcharges and a final ADVO was refused by the Magistrate following a two-daycontested hearing at Sutherland Local Court.
Client 3 (1) Mr DB
The Respondent contacted our office after being served withan interim FVIO taken out by his ex-partner following a breakdown in theirco-parenting relationship.
The Respondent was a competitive shooter and had recentlyhad his firearms confiscated by Victoria Police and his licence suspended dueto the interim order. The Respondent initially believed that the only way hewould be able to resume competitive shooting was by contesting the applicant’sallegations and defeating the application at a contested hearing. While thiscould be achieved, it would have come at considerable cost in both time andmoney, as well damage the Respondent’s relationship with the Applicant further.
Instead of contesting the application, our officesuccessfully negotiated with the applicant to remove the condition suspendingthe Respondent’s firearms licence. A final intervention order was consented towithout admission on this basis.
The removal of the licence suspension conditionopened the door for the Respondent to make a private application to the Echuca Magistrates Court to be deemed a non-prohibited person under the Firearms Act.Where the Respondent could have expected to wait up to a year or more tocontest the intervention order, in this case, the Respondent was able to obtaina Magistrates’ order that they were not at a prohibited person under the Firearms Act, and return to competitive shooting, in just a few months atconsiderably less expense.
Client 4 (1) Mr J.F
The Respondent had been served with a Personal Safety Intervention Order (PSIO) by Victoria Police and interviewed in relation tomultiple criminal allegations.
After meeting with the Respondent and getting to understandtheir background and the circumstances of the alleged offending we encouragedthe Respondent to take proactive steps to address underlying mental healthissues and engage in rehabilitative programs.
The criminal charges were contested. Ultimately,the Police agreed to withdraw the most serious charges and supported adiversion order for the remaining charge, offering the Respondent the chance toavoid a criminal record entirely provided there was continued compliance withthe existing PSIO.
Client 5 (1) Ms A.E
The Respondent in this matter was a Protective Services Officer who had been served with an interim FVIO.
As a result of theintervention order the Respondent was stood down and relegated to desk dutieswhile the matter proceeded in Court.
Our office successfully fought the applicationto a contested hearing, where the intervention order was withdrawn, and thematter struck out.
The Respondent was allowed to resume normal work duties withno Court orders against him.
Client 6 (1) Mr P.R
The Respondent was served with a Family Violence Safety Notice and interviewed in relation to an alleged assault.
An interim FVIO was made against the Respondent, and they were charged with an unlawful assault.
Our office had to delicately manage an intervention order proceeding, criminalproceeding, and a Family Law proceeding at the same time.
After reviewing the police brief, we identifiedseveral weaknesses with the Prosecution case. The matter was resolved short ofa contested hearing with the Police agreeing to withdraw the assault charge andfinalise the intervention order for six months as a safe contact order only.
Request a Free Case Review Today!
Provide us with details of your situation, and we will guideyou through the legal process relating to Domestic Violence, Intervention Orders, Apprehended Violence and Safety Notices.
- Whether you need protection or are defending an applicationagainst you, we are leading the way - front and rear - to protect you and your rights.
Our experienced lawyers are here and ready to help you navigate all matters about Intervention Orders (IVO) and PersonalSafety Intervention Orders (PSIO).