Appeal Grounds For Ivo

I would like to attach my grounds for appeal of IVO duration to county court Victoria for you to critique

The magistrate failed to afford procedural fairness by proceeding with the hearing and granting a *-month extension of the Family Violence Intervention Order (FVIO) without hearing the Applicant’s position. Despite the Applicant contacting the police prosecution to request a brief adjournment and being willing to provide evidence, the magistrate chose to proceed in her absence. This decision contravened Section *(*) (c). of the Family Violence Protection Act *, which requires courts “in making a decision as to the period for which the final order is to be in force, the court must take into account if the applicant is not the protected person, the protected person's views, including the protected person's assessment of the level and duration of the risk from the respondent” Additionally, the magistrate failed to exercise discretion under Section *(*). of the Magistrates' Court Act *, which empowers the court to adjourn proceedings as necessary or just in the circumstances. The refusal to adjourn denied the Applicant a fair opportunity to present her views and critical evidence, including the escalating nature of the respondent’s behaviour and persistent FVIO breaches. Furthermore, the magistrate proceeded without allowing the prosecution to retrieve the police brief of evidence, which contained critical information, thereby exacerbating the denial of procedural fairness. The magistrate also relied on the defense counsel's assertion that a *-month FVIO duration had been agreed with the police prosecution without consulting the Applicant or corroborating this assertion with the prosecution, as the police brief was unavailable. This assertion, which was not substantiated or verified, further undermined procedural fairness and denied the Applicant the opportunity to present her views on the severity and escalation of the respondent’s violence. The Magistrate’s decision contravened Section *(*) (b). of the Family Violence Intervention Act * by not taking into account any assessment by the applicant of the level and duration of the risk from the respondent as the request by Prosecution to retrieve the brief was not granted. • Page *, Lines *–*: " Your Honour I did actually just ask – apologies to your clerk last minute, if we could stand this matter down. The AFM accidentally went to MJC this morning and she’s called our office and asked if we could hold off and not have the matter heard in her absence. I believe she’ll only be another * minutes” • Page *, Lines *-*: “Well, what is proposed to occur today? * MS ALLENBY: Victorian Police – apologies my briefs gone back out.” • Page *, Lines *-*: “If your Honour is minded to proceed, I can get the brief from my instructors” • Page *, Lines ​*-*: “I understood we had agreement? Is there a - - - HIS HONOUR: What's your understanding Mr Sherman? What do you understand - - - MR SHERMAN: My understanding was we'd resolve it on a 12 month basis.” • Page *, Lines *-*: “That may be the case Your Honour but since then, since my learned friend spoke to my instructors the AFM has contacted the office of my instructors and asked if we could hold – hold fire because she wants to appear in person. So, I'm in the court's hands.” • Page *, Lines *-*: HIS HONOUR: Because her instructions are changing or? MS ALLENBY: I'm unsure Your Honour and we can't get on to her because she's in the car. • Page *, Lines *–*: " I'm just going to deal with the matter. Mr Sherman, your client’s prepared to consent without admissions to the extension of the order for 12 months?" • Page *, Lines *-*: “Yes, Your Honour.” HIS HONOUR: “Yes, thank you. All right I will make the order in the same terms.” Ground * Factual The magistrate failed to consider critical evidence that was either available at the time or should have been obtained and considered. This includes but is not limited to: • Text Messages and Video Evidence: Threats from the respondent, including "I hope the house burns down with you in it," and videos narrating self-harm. These materials were part of charges for persistent FVIO breaches but were not reviewed during the hearing. • Child Protection Recommendations: Records from Child Protection highlighting concerns about the respondent’s behaviour, including threats to set himself on fire, and their recommendation that the children have no contact with him. • Police Records and Brief of Evidence: Persistent FVIO breaches, including encouraging the children to harm the Applicant’s partner and other coercive acts. The police brief of evidence was unavailable during the hearing, resulting in a failure to review these and other critical details. The failure to consider this and other evidence resulted in an order that does not adequately reflect the severity and ongoing nature of the respondent’s behaviour. The magistrate’s decision was based on incomplete information, undermining the fairness and accuracy of the outcome. • Page *, Lines *–*: "We were relying on an affidavit of support from the AFM and not her position." • Page *, Lines *-*: “Well, what is proposed to occur today?” * MS ALLENBY: Victorian Police – “apologies my briefs gone back out.” • Page *, Lines *-*: “If your Honour is minded to proceed, I can get the brief from my instructors” • Page *, Lines *–*: "Mr Sherman, your client’s prepared to consent without admissions to the extension of the order for 12 months?" Ground * Discretionary The magistrate’s decision to grant only a *-month extension of the FVIO failed to properly consider the evidence of escalating risks posed by the respondent. This includes persistent breaches, manipulative behavior, and failure to comply with court orders. The decision does not align with Section *(*). of the Family Violence Protection Act *, which mandates that the safety of protected persons and children is paramount. The Magistrates decision to grant only a 12 month extension on the FVIO does not align with Section *(*) (a). of the Family Violence Intervention Act *, which stipulates “In making a decision as to the period for which the final order is to be in force, the court must take into account that the safety of the protected person is paramount. The magistrate also failed to properly exercise discretion under section *(*). of the Magistrates' Court Act * by not adjourning the hearing to allow access to the police brief or presentation of verbal evidence by the Applicant. This failure deprived the Applicant of the opportunity to fully present evidence of the respondent’s escalating behaviour, including Child Protection recommendations, threats, and coercive acts. A longer FVIO duration would have been more appropriate, reflecting the severity of the risks posed by the respondent. The Magistrate’s decision contravened Section *(*) (b). of the Family Violence Intervention Act * by not taking into account any assessment by the applicant of the level and duration of the risk from the respondent as the request by Prosecution to retrieve the brief was not granted. • Page *, Lines *–*: " Your Honour I did actually just ask – apologies to your clerk last minute, if we could stand this matter down. The AFM accidentally went to MJC this morning and she’s called our office and asked if we could hold off and not have the matter heard in her absence. I believe she’ll only be another * minutes” • Page *, Lines *-*: “Well, what is proposed to occur today? * MS ALLENBY: Victorian Police – apologies my briefs gone back out.” • Page *, Lines *-*: “If your Honour is minded to proceed, I can get the brief from my instructors” • Page *, Lines ​*-*: “I understood we had agreement? Is there a - - - HIS HONOUR: What's your understanding Mr Sherman? What do you understand - - - MR SHERMAN: My understanding was we'd resolve it on a 12 month basis.” • Page *, Lines *-*: “That may be the case Your Honour but since then, since my learned friend spoke to my instructors the AFM has contacted the office of my instructors and asked if we could hold – hold fire because she wants to appear in person. So, I'm in the court's hands.” • Page *, Lines *–*: " I'm just going to deal with the matter. Mr Sherman, your client’s prepared to consent without admissions to the extension of the order for 12 months?" • Page *, Lines *–*: "All right, I will make the order in the same terms.

How do I emphasize how the magistrates decision contravened specific sections of the acts

Would I save this detail for my submissions at a later date?

Is my details above enough to constitute grounds for appeal under legal, factual and discretionary errors of the magistrate for the initial stage

Yes

This is just for IVO Form A Statement of grounds of appeal County Court for Directions hearing

Is it suffucient?

List any relevant Australian case law for submissions

Any others?

Any regarding discretion to adjourn?

Any regarding adjournments and family violence matter?

Any regarding non availability of police brief in family violence matters or any matters where this amounts to procedural unfairness

Any case law relating to the manipulation of the court process by defense lawyer

Any as last question but also in family violence context

Where can I find these cases in a legal database

I can’t find any of these cases in legal data bases

Are you sure they are real cases?