Withdrawing a Personal Safety Intervention Order

This is a case study on withdrawing a personal safety intervention order.

Our client had owned his house for twenty years. Over this time the neighbourhood had changed significantly, and of course so had the neighbours. A young family eventually moved in next door and relationships were initially friendly. Home grown produce was shared. Then the family commenced a double storey extension with a window looking into our client’s house. Negotiations about the window failed and relationships soured.

What is alleged to have occured?
Ultimately our client was served with an application for a personal safety intervention order alleging abusive behaviour towards the neighbours, together with an interim order restricting his behaviour. Among other conditions, the interim order prohibited our client from being within five meters of his neighbours.

Their driveways were however adjacent to each other and there was a real possibility that our client could unintentionally breach the order. Contravening any condition of the personal safety intervention order would lead to criminal charges.

What happened at court?
Kate Da Costa provided legal representation for the client at the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court related to the personal safety IVO.

Helpfully, the neighbours had also engaged legal representation and Kate was able to engage in lengthy and meaningful discussions seeking to resolve the matter.

What was the result?
As a result of these discussions, and expressions of regret that the matter had landed all parties in court, the neighbours accepted an undertaking from our client that he would not communicate with or approach them for twelve months.

An undertaking is a promise to behave in a particular way, and is not enforceable by the police in the same way as an intervention order. The application for a personal safety intervention order was withdrawn against the client.

The client was grateful that, with Kate’s legal representation, withdrawing the personal safety intervention order was made possible. The matter was able to be resolved with a promise that he was able to keep, and without the threat of police involvement.

Related case studies

Kate Da CostaKate Da Costa

Kate is one of our senior associates and is part of our Sunshine team. She regularly represents clients at the Sunshine Magistrates’ Court for various criminal legal issues.

Admitted to legal practice in 2002, Kate has since been working exclusively in the field of criminal law. She has experience in all Victorian criminal law jurisdictions including in the High Court of Australia.

View Kate Da Costa’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 10/10/2019