Personal Safety Intervention Orders: Counter-Application Case Study

Intervention Order Law

Intervention Orders (IVO) are not solely for family violence matters. There are also Personal Safety Intervention Orders (PSIO). This is a court order to protect you from another person’s behaviour. It could be a neighbour, friend, colleague etc.

When applying for an IVO there are two types of orders: interim and final. An interim order is a short-term order made until all evidence is heard and final orders can be made.

Background to the Personal Safety Intervention Order Dispute

This matter involves interim and final orders and what seems to be a counter IVO application.

Interim Orders and Counter-Applications

A PSIO application was submitted in 2023 by a mother (the Applicant), our client, who listed herself and her children as the protected persons, against another mother (the Respondent), not friends but two adults with children attending the same school who were experiencing issues.

Before an order could be made on this PSIO it was withdrawn with an undertaking. An undertaking is a legal promise to the court to not do/do something.

Due to continuing, concerning behaviours the Applicant, with Aston Legal representation, participated in a hearing to reinstate the PSIO application. Based off evidence given by way of oral submissions from both parties the court reinstated the application, and an interim order was made against the Respondent.

Before the above mentioned hearing the Respondent themselves made an application for a PSIO against our client, the Applicant mother above, and a PSIO against the Applicant mothers Husband. When this matter was heard the Court refused to order an interim IVO at the time. The matter was adjourned to a direction hearing for the Court to see how much further evidence each side would present and allow the court to determine how much time to set aside for a future hearing.

The further hearings for the new PSIO applications by the Respondent and the final orders of the first PSIO interim orders were set for 2024. The parties provided Further and Better Particulars (FBP) which is common in IVO matters. FBP’s are when further information is needed. It allows parties to give detailed accounts.

Outcome: Final Protection Order and Refused Counter-Applications

The second, counter orders, made by the Respondent in the first order, were both refused in 2024. The test for the court is whether the order is necessary for the safety and protection of Applicant. Based on evidence heard, the court was not satisfied there was sufficient evidence. The PSIO application, from our client, that was given an interim order, the first matter, was given final orders by the court in 2024. Some of the conditions included to not: stalk the protected persons; commit prohibited behaviour to protected persons; attempt to locate, follow or keep under surveillance etc.