Case study:
Securing an Intervention Order
When Police Sought to Withdraw

Facts:

Family Violence Intervention Orders (FVIOs) play a critical role in protecting individuals and children from family violence. However, obtaining an Intervention Order is not always the end of the process. Where an order is approaching its expiry, a protected person may need to apply for an extension if there remains an ongoing need for protection.

Importantly, the Court does not automatically extend an Intervention Order simply because one previously existed. The Applicant must satisfy the Court that there are reasonable grounds to continue fearing family violence and that extending the order remains necessary in the circumstances. Each application is determined on its own facts, with the Court carefully weighing the available evidence and any changes since the original order was made.

In this matter, our office acted for the protected person in an application seeking to extend an existing Family Violence Intervention Order.

At the commencement of the hearing, the matter presented significant challenges. Victoria Police, who had initially brought the application, were considering withdrawing their support for the extension following aspects of their investigation. Had that occurred, our client would have been left to pursue the extension without Police support.

Despite these difficulties, our office made detailed submissions addressing the ongoing risk factors and the broader evidentiary picture, ultimately persuading Police to reserve their position rather than withdraw altogether.

Procedural History and Submissions:

The primary issue before the Court was whether the evidence demonstrated that the protected persons continued to require the protection of an Intervention Order.

Our submissions focused on the fact that the Court’s assessment should not be limited to whether recent criminal offending had been established. The Court was instead invited to consider the totality of the circumstances and the ongoing protective purpose of the legislation.

Among the matters relied upon were:

1. the existence of an ongoing specialist police investigation which had not yet concluded (SOCIT);
2. evidence that the investigation extended beyond the original allegations and included matters affecting the children;
3. the fact that child protection authorities had concluded their involvement because they considered our client to be a protective parent, rather than because any concerns had been disproved;
4. evidence that the Respondent had attempted to communicate with the children notwithstanding the existing orders;
5. the Respondent’s failure to file substantive material responding to the allegations despite having the opportunity to do so;
6. the Respondent’s failure to complete recommended behavioural intervention programs; and
7. the need for the Court to consider outstanding investigative material before determining whether the protective orders should cease. 

Throughout the hearing, we maintained that the purpose of the legislation is preventative as opposed to punitive. The question for the Court was not whether criminal charges had been proven, but whether continued protection remained appropriate having regard to the risk of future family violence.

Final Outcome:

During the course of submissions, Police reconsidered their position.

Rather than withdrawing the application, Police agreed to reserve their position, allowing the Court to continue considering the protective issues raised by our office. The matter ultimately resolved by consent with the Court making an order extending the Intervention Order for a further 12 months.

The final orders continued protection for the affected family members while preserving our client’s ability to seek a further extension should circumstances require it before the order expires. The outcome represented a significant improvement from the position at the commencement of the hearing, when Police were actively considering withdrawing support for the Application altogether.

Applications to extend Intervention Orders can often be misunderstood, as many people assume that because an Intervention Order was previously made, it will simply be renewed when it expires. That is not the case. Where investigations remain ongoing, where there are children involved, or where the surrounding circumstances continue to give rise to legitimate safety concerns, it is essential that those matters are properly presented to the Court.

This matter demonstrates the importance of experienced advocacy, even where the prospects initially appear uncertain. Faced with the possibility that Police would withdraw from the proceeding, our office carefully identified the outstanding issues, presented detailed submissions regarding the ongoing risk to our client and her children, and ultimately assisted in achieving an outcome that preserved meaningful protection.

While every case depends on its own facts, strategic preparation and effective advocacy can often make a significant difference to the outcome.

Contact Us

If you are seeking to obtain, contest or extend/vary a Family Violence Intervention Order, or have been served with an application, obtaining timely legal advice is essential. Please contact our office on (03) 8391 8411 to book a free 30-minute consultation with one of our solicitors.

Our experienced family violence lawyers regularly appear in Magistrates’ Courts across Victoria and can advise you on your rights and ways to maximise your prospects of achieving a successful outcome.