Case Study
Intervention Order Case Study: Securing a Two-Year Extension
Case Overview
Court: Magistrates’ Court of Victoria, Broadmeadows
Address: 15 Dimboola Road, Broadmeadows VIC 3047
Outcome: Successful two-year extension of Family Violence Intervention Order protecting the Applicant and her children.
This case involved an application by our client, the Affected Family Member, to extend an existing Family Violence Intervention Order protecting both her and her two children.
The matter presented a particular challenge because there had been no recent breaches of the Intervention Order. However, the absence of recent breaches needed to be considered in the context of the Respondent having spent periods in and out of custody and the parties having had very limited contact.
Our client remained fearful that, without the protection of an Intervention Order, she and the children would again be exposed to a risk of family violence.
Application to Extend Family Violence Intervention Order
An existing Intervention Order is not automatically extended simply because it has previously provided protection.
Where an AFM seeks an extension, the Court must be satisfied that there remains a proper basis for the order to continue. This can become more complex where a significant period has passed since the original incidents or there have been no recent breaches.
In this matter, our client instructed that the Respondent had been in and out of custody over a number of years. Although this had limited his opportunity to breach the existing Intervention Order, our client’s position was that the underlying risk had not disappeared.
To support our client’s application, our office prepared and filed comprehensive Further and Better Particulars setting out the history of the relationship, the alleged family violence, the Respondent’s history of non-compliance with legal procedures and the continuing effect of the family violence upon our client and the children.
Our client sought an extension for a period of at least two years with full no-contact conditions.
Despite being given the opportunity to participate in the proceedings, the Respondent did not file any substantive material responding to our client’s Further and Better Particulars. The Respondent also failed to attend the hearing.
The Court was therefore required to determine the application in circumstances where the Respondent had been served with the proceeding and afforded an opportunity to participate but had not availed himself of that opportunity.
Submissions on ongoing risk
At the hearing, our office made detailed submissions as to why the absence of recent breaches did not mean that the risk to our client and the children had ceased.
Our submissions emphasised that the Respondent had been given every reasonable opportunity to engage with the proceedings. His failure to file responsive material or attend Court should not prevent the Court from determining whether continued protection was necessary, particularly where the safety of children was involved.
Successful IVO extension outcome
The Court granted the extended period of protection sought by our client, with the Final Intervention Order continuing for a further period of two years.
This matter demonstrates the importance of properly preparing an application for extension. Detailed Further and Better Particulars allowed the Court to consider not simply the historical allegations, but the continuing risk factors, the effect of the alleged family violence upon the children and why our client continued to require protection.
Need Guidance on Intervention Orders?