VIC Personal safety intervention order

[Noisy Witness]

I was wondering if some-one could shed light on an aspect of personal safety intervention orders. My neighbour has had an interim order served on him for a person alleging 'he is known to be violent and bad tempered' - but no specific behaviour is alleged. On Sunday 2 May, I saw the applicant park his vehicle partially over my neighbour's driveway, get out and walk up to his front fence. He then rang my neighbour and left a message that said in part '...if you've got cameras, I'm looking forward to being charged.'
My neighbour rang the local police to report this very provocative behaviour, but they were not interested. I heard the conversation and I was surprised by how judgemental the officer was towards my neighbour.
Does this sort of behaviour by the applicant constitute an offence or negate the interim order, or can my neighbour apply to have it overturned rather than going to a contested hearing? These were not the actions of some-one who claimed to fear for their personal safety.
Thanks,
Noisy Witness

 

[Atticus]

Does this sort of behaviour by the applicant constitute an offence or negate the interim order, or can my neighbour apply to have it overturned rather than going to a contested hearing?

Provocation is not of itself an offense, nor will it negate in any way the interim order.... The neighbour could definitely use the footage as evidence of provocation though.

 

[Noisy Witness]

Thanks Atticus,
That is good to know. No footage though, just a noisy witness!
There is an underlying issue that complicates the matter. My neighbour has taken possession of an adjoining paddock that was abandoned in 2017 by a previous adverse possessor who died last year as an undischarged bankrupt. The land is part of a special survey - very messy. In his statement, the applicant has claimed that the paddock is his property but we know that this is blatantly false - he does not own it and he does not use it in any way.
The applicant states that he wants the intervention order to keep my neighbour off 'his' property because he (the neighbour) wants to claim it by adverse possession. Given that it is not the applicant's property, we assumed that he must be working on behalf of some-one else in an effort to regain possession of the paddock. The police, in defending the applicant's actions, inferred very strongly that he is acting on behalf of the bankrupt's daughter to regain the land - but the chain of possession is broken.
Since my first post, a local real estate agent who is a joint trustee in the bankruptcy, has confirmed that the applicant does not own the land, stating 'It's none of his business!' She is exasperated by his interference and he has been banned from her office for haranguing her staff. The applicant is known variously as 'the QC' and the 'the sheriff' due to his propensity to interfere in other people's legal affairs; 'more front than Myers', as some say.
If it can be proven that the applicant lied in his statement, can he be prosecuted?
Is it a legitimate use of the intervention order process to seek an order for an undisclosed third party?
Is it a legitimate use of the process to attempt to regain control of possessory land?

Noisy Witness

 

[Atticus]

Was the intervention order applied for by police or a private application by him?

If it can be proven that the applicant lied in his statement, can he be prosecuted?

Signing a statement/affidavit knowing that the contents are false is an offense... I believe it's up to the to the magistrate to refer it for charges & prosecution though. Courts are usually reluctant to call out this stuff in DV proceedings using the reasoning that to prosecute may result in a reluctance on the part of actual abuse victims to seek protection orders... That said, the court may be less accepting as this is not a domestic violence order, it's a personal protection order.... I know in NSW there is provision in the act HERE ... Doesn't seem to be the same provision in the VIC act though.

Is it a legitimate use of the intervention order process to seek an order for an undisclosed third party?

Not in the way you have described, ie, the named protected person is not the owner of the land.

Is it a legitimate use of the process to attempt to regain control of possessory land?

Again, not in the way you have described... it would be very close to an abuse of process I would think.

 

[Noisy Witness]

Atticus,
The applicant applied for the order on his own behalf; there was no involvement from the police. No prohibited behaviour was reported to the police and none is alleged in the statement, just that my neighbour 'is known to be violent and bad tempered.' This is just hearsay of a rather speculative nature.
The interim order was a bolt out of the blue as there was no lead-up; the applicant had not spoken to my neighbour since late last year. The applicant's claims to own the land were just jaw-dropping.
I've previously had dealings with the applicant that show how he operates: in 2018, I impounded horses under the Impounding of Livestock Act for the non-payment of agistment fees; the nags belonged to a female associate of his. In my absence, he cut the chain on the gate and took the horses. He marched into the local police station and declared that he had taken the horses because the impounding was 'illegal.' The end result was that he and his associate were prosecuted by the shire and pleaded guilty to a number of charges at the Sale Magistrates' Court.
The current situation is very similar in that our self-appointed QC has taken it upon himself to come to the aid of another 'damsel in distress,' seemingly without regard to the consequences. Perhaps it's a bluff...
Thank you for your comments as they have brought some clarity. There has been a lot of head scratching trying to make sense of this very strange situation.

Noisy Witness

 

[Atticus]

Given there appears to be no allegations by the applicant of actual conduct that might lead to him wanting/needing a PSIO, then I can only assume the application was accepted on the grounds of protecting 'his' property... If that's the case & you can prove it isn't his property, then the entire grounds for it falls over... unless of course your neighbor gets provoked into doing something.

Is it a legitimate use of the intervention order process to seek an order for an undisclosed third party?

Assuming he isn't actually a legal practitioner, then It's possible that he was 'acting in concert'... If that's the case this may be of some interest >>>> VEXATIOUS PROCEEDINGS ACT 2014 - SECT 4 Meaning of acting in concert

You should get the advice of a lawyer as to whether an action can be bought against him.

 

[Noisy Witness]

Atticus,
Our self-appointed QC is an old-school bush lawyer - long on bluster and short on knowledge. My neighbour realises that the applicant was trying to provoke him and I doubt if he will be drawn in as he wants to clear his name in court.
We will be assembling the necessary paperwork to show who actually owns the land. The shire has confirmed that there have been no transactions on the property from the bankrupt estate.
My neighbour will indeed be seeking the advice of a lawyer this week. Your input has been invaluable in providing the clarity to know how to proceed.
Thanks again,

Noisy Witness