Family violence protection order laws if you have been charged with breaching a family violence order or apprehended violence order or require an avo lawyer to make an application on your behalf it is important to seek legal advice immediately the Criminal Lawyers at George Sten are available for urgent telephone advise 24 hours a day. George Sten & Co has over 50 years experience in Criminal Law. Don’t take chances with your reputation, future or livelihood. George Sten & Co are one of Sydney’s leading criminal law firms. We only practice in Criminal Law. If you have been arrested talk to our Criminal Defence Lawyers before you agree to a police interview. This could be the difference to your out come in court.
Domestic and family violence unfortunately does occur and as a consequence, all jurisdictions in Australia have laws that protect a spouse, child, relatives and other household members from being victims of violence. If a person is experiencing any instances of family violence, an application can be made by the victim of domestic violence, the police, or any other authorised person. There are variations between the States in regards to who, and how, a protection order can be made that this article will attempt to touch upon. Additionally, this piece will also endeavour to cover the type of orders that can be made in general.
All States within Australia authorises the police to apply for a protection order on behalf of the victim. However, there are differences between the States in the degree of police responsibility that exists requiring the police to take action on behalf of a victim, which dependent on the nature of the legislation, the policy of the police in each jurisdiction, and other related guidelines.
In many jurisdictions there will be a positive obligation by the police to apply for a protection order if the situation requires, for example, in under ss 67-72 of the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 (QLD), there is a requirement that the police must apply for a protection order in instances where a person is taken into custody due to a concern about the potential for injury to the person or damage to property.
If the victim of family violence is a child under the age of 16, then under s 48(3) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), only the police can apply for an order.
Victims also have the capacity to initiate an order or alternatively, a person is able to have a lawyer to initiate an action on their behalf. There are also certain authorised persons who can bring an application on behalf of the victim, and will stand in their shoes in such a scenario.
We can turn to s 45 of the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 (VIC), which outlines the authorised parties that can bring an application, and includes the following:
Although the behaviours that are defined as family or domestic violence vary between the jurisdictions, the actions that are covered are broad and can include conduct that causes physical or psychological abuse, sexual abuse, property damage, stalking, behaviour that is threatening or harassing, deprivation of liberty or threats to carry any of the aforementioned conduct.
Interestingly, the Northern Territory, Tasmania and Victoria also recognise, and have legislation in place, against ‘economic abuse’, and economic abuse can be a foundation of a protection order.
Using s 8 of the Domestic and Family Violence Act 2007 (NT), economic abuse can either include one, or a combination of the following behaviours:
Legislation in all jurisdictions grants the courts broad powers to make orders that act as a restraint to the future conduct of a person, and standard conditions mandate that a person does not commit domestic violence, or refrain from committing family violence against a protected person.
Further orders can also include the restriction of a person from contacting, or approaching the protected person, and preventing a person from coming within a specified distance in relation to the victim’s home, place of employment, or the school of a child.
Laws exist in all States and Territories that grants the courts the power to order the violent person to be excluded from the family home, or any other particular property, irrespective if the person has a legal or equitable right to the property.
Orders which exclude the person from a particular property are known as ‘ouster’ or ‘exclusion’ orders, and the decision to exclude a person requires a number of considerations to be made by the courts.
Turning to Victoria’s Family Violence Protection Act as our example, under s 82(2) of the Act, the court when making an order to exclude a respondent from the residence must consider:
“(a) the desirability of minimising disruption to the protected person and any child living with the protected person and the importance of maintaining social networks and support which may be lost if the protected person and the child were required to leave the residence or unable to return to or move into the residence;
(b) the desirability of continuity and stability in the care of any child living with the protected person;
(c) the desirability of allowing any childcare arrangements, education, training or employment of the protected person or any child living with the protected person to continue without interruption or disturbance.”
It should also be highlighted that provisions exist in many States that allows a tenancy agreement to be transferred to the applicant if an ouster order is made.
If the safety of a person is an issue, then domestic violence legislation allows a protection order to be obtained quickly to ensure the safety of the applicant.
Furthermore, interim orders can also be granted ex parte (without the presence of the other party) preventing the person from behaving violently until a full hearing.
Interim or urgent orders can be made before the service of an application or notice of proceedings has been given to the respondent, and can be issued on some of the following grounds:
Recognition of the need for emergency orders to be executed quickly, has seen some States granting the police the power to issue temporary protection orders: such as s 14(1) of the Family Violence Act 2004 (TAS) that allows an officer of the rank of sergeant or above, or someone authorised by the Commissioner of Police, to issue police family violence orders if the officer is satisfied that a person has committed, or is likely to commit, an act of family violence.
Interim orders can last until a specified period, or until it is revoked, or a final order is made and served on a respondent, or until an application is refused.
For the courts to grant a final order, it must be satisfied that the person conducting the acts of family or domestic violence has committed the acts, or is likely to do so in the future.
When making a protection application to the court, the usual rules of evidence are not always applicable when making a determination in relation to an application. Additionally, applicants in many jurisdictions are also protected from the possibility of being cross examined by the respondent.
However, it is essential to note that most States require parties to inform the courts of any relevant orders that are in operation, especially if the subject matter of the order is in relation to children or injunctions made by either the Family Court or Federal Magistrates Court, under the provisions of theFamily Law Act 1975 (Cth).
For the most part, parties to the matter, an authorised person, or the police, have the ability to apply to revoke or vary the terms of the order if the circumstances regarding the matter have changed. However, certain requirements or conditions must be adhered to and in some States, it is especially difficult for a respondent to vary or revoke an order because the respondent may be unduly influencing an applicant. We can look to s 36(2)(c) and (3) of Queensland’s Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act as an example:
“(2) In considering the application, the court must have regard to–
(a) any expressed wishes of the aggrieved; and
(b) any current contact between the aggrieved and respondent; and
(c) whether any pressure has been applied, or threat has been made, to the aggrieved by the respondent or someone else for the respondent; and
(d) any other relevant matter.
(3) The court may only revoke the order if the court considers the safety of the aggrieved or a named person would not be compromised by the revocation.”
It should be pointed out that a person found in breach of an order may be liable to criminal sanctions that can either result in fines or imprisonment.