This is a case study on a personal safety intervention order in Heidelberg involving a client whose goal was to prevent a final intervention order from being created. The application was eventually withdrawn and the matter resolved by way of undertakings.
What are the circumstances of the case?
Our client was a respondent in a personal safety intervention order application that had been brought by a person who was known to the client through their former partner. The police had applied for the intervention order on behalf of the protected person and cited the basis as our client harassing the protected person about their relationships and friendships with others. The client did not agree that it accurately characterised the interactions between them. This led to the client engaging our firm to try and avoid a final intervention order from being created.
What happened at court?
The matter was heard at the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court and Brittany Llewellyn acted on the client’s behalf.
We spent a considerable period of time understanding the history of our client’s relationship and interactions with the protected person. It became apparent that there were significant evidentiary issues which would arise in the event the matter proceeded to a contested hearing. These issues extended to whether the alleged conduct could be proven given the poor quality of the evidence the police had to support the claims, as well as issues around the admissibility of some of the evidence intended to be relied upon by the police.
The client was also nearing completion of their study for a profession in the medical field and was concerned about the implications a final intervention order might have had on their registration process.
On this particular case of personal safety intervention order in Heidelberg, we engaged rigorously with the police with a view to having them agree to an undertaking in the matter. We highlighted the deficiencies in the evidence to them and we emphasised the positive qualities of the client.
What was the result of the application for personal safety intervention order in Heidelberg?
Following the discussions, the police withdrew as applicant. Rather than take over the application in their personal capacity, the protected person agreed to resolve the matter by way of undertakings.
Britt Llewellyn
Britt appears regularly at all metropolitan and regional Magistrates' courts across Victoria and has a busy indictable practice with carriage of County Court, Supreme Court and Court of Appeal matters. She is particularly experienced in diversion applications and tricky pleas.Britt is committed to her clients and believes that a criminal charge need not define a person, nor determine their future prospects.
View Britt Llewellyn's profile.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 13/02/2025
