QLD Withdrawing Private Application for a DVO?

[Mya_h]

Hello,

I made a DVO application against my ex-partner. The order is currently only temporary and the court date has been adjourned to a later date. However, I wish to withdraw my application as circumstances have changed and wish to not carry out the DVO against him.

I have been told I have to fill out a new application to have the DVO withdrawn and have to see the magistrate again. How easy is it to have the magistrate to allow a withdraw? If I don’t attend future court hearings will they just dismiss the case entirely?

 

[GlassHalfFull]

I think it should be fairly easy, as long as you can convince them that you are not under duress and that there is genuinely a change of circumstances. I know that if the police were running your case, they would be less keen to withdraw the application.

I don't know for sure if the case would be dismissed if you didn't turn up. Probably not, but it may be at the magistrate's discretion. You should really fill out the form, attend and advise the magistrate in person.

 

[Tremaine]

Did you file it privately or did the police file on your behalf?

We wrote a letter of discontinuance to the Magistrates Court advising we wished to discontinue proceedings on grounds ‘the order was no longer necessary’. In the background, my partner had negotiated parenting orders with his ex that also addressed the issues which underpinned the DVO application.

This was in Queensland. I am not sure if the process has changed or not, but I think you can call the registry and ask.

 

[Mya_h]

Thanks for your reply, yes I filed the application privately. Will definitely look into it further cheers

 

[Tim W]

Your better off leaving it in place, and just lettng it expire naturally.

 

[GlassHalfFull]

How can you say they are better off? They might actually want to return to the relationship and not put that person at risk of criminality? I know there are plenty of arguments about whether it's sensible to return to a partner who has (we assume) committed some form of domestic violence, but unless you want to take the OP to task about their ability to make sensible decisions, I'm not sure it's appropriate to comment on what they are better off doing?

 

[Atticus]

Your better off leaving it in place, and just lettng it expire naturally.

We are talking about Qld... That's five years, I believe?

 

[Tim W]

How can you say they are better off?

Well, 27 years of professional experience and judgement
does tend to inform the conclusions to which one jumps in this area.

They might actually want to return to the relationship and not put that person at risk of criminality?

I'm sure there are cases where that's true.
What do we have from OP that puts them in this atypical minority?

In any event, it is not never her responsibility to "not put that person at risk of criminality".
Not doing crime? That.Is.All.On.Him.

What should happen here is that if the Respondent/ Defendant wants to "avoid criminality",
then he should simply not do any of the things he should not do anyway.
For example, he should not behave in a (the?) way that gave rise to the reasonable apprehension
that underlay the original order.
Let alone not actually assault, threaten, harass, intimidate, stalk the PINOP etc.

Luckily for OP, the courts are well versed in assessing who has been
intimitdated, buillied, threatened, and/or emotionally or psychologically manipulated
into asking for an order to be withdrawn.
They see it often. Even a lot.

I know there are plenty of arguments about whether it's sensible to return to a partner who has (we assume) committed some form of domestic violence, but unless you want to take the OP to task about their ability to make sensible decisions, I'm not sure it's appropriate to comment on what they are better off doing?

I don't follow the logic of your statement here.
In any event, I don't much mind if you think it's appropriate or not.

We are talking about Qld.... That's five YEARS I believe?

Perhaps not in this case.
Do I read it correctly that OP is asking about withdrawing an interim order?

 

[sammy01]

Tim... I'm keen to hear your thinking.

See my problem here is the OP requested an avo. Now, she doesn't want it... Seems a bit volatile.

So they've kissed and made up. Nice. Happy ending. But if there is an argument at some point while the AVO still exists and she calls the cops. He will be done for breach avo. Now the fact that she asked him to move back in (or whatever the rules are on that particular avo) are breached. He is in breach.

He would be mad to go anywhere near this person while an avo is in place - Hence I reckon the let it die a natural death suggestion isn't a great suggestion? Discuss...

 

[Tim W]

Seems a bit volitile.

Less often "volatile".
More often, harrassed or guilt tripped into withdrawing.

Examples (not all there is, and in no particular order):

• "I'll lose my job, and if I lose my job, you'll lose the house";
• "I'll stop/ change/ give up alcohol/ ice/ dope/ acid/ speed/ other vice(s)";
• "Do you want to make me a criminal, is that it?"
• "You're breaking up the family";
• "You'll shame the family";
• "It's between you and me, and is nobody else's business";
• "Nobody will believe you";
• "You're trashing my reputation, over nothing";
• "You'll have to go in the witness box, where my lawyer will rip you up
  (this particular one is highly effective at scaring women PINOPs off going ahead);
• "You provoked me. You know that";
• "It'll show up on my Police Check when I go for a job";
• "I'll unsponsor, you and have you kicked out of Australia"

So they've kissed and made up. NICE. Happy ending.

One always hopes.
However, one is disappointed, more often than not.

BUT if there is an argument at some point while the AVO still exists and she calls the cops. He will be done for breach avo. Now the fact that she asked him to move back in (or whatever the rules are on that particular avo) are breached. He is in breach.

All he has to do is behave himself, and not breach the order.
In any event, police are pretty good at picking a false/ malicious allegation of breach.

He would be mad to go anywhere near this person while an avo is in place - Hence I reckon the let it die a natural death suggestion isn't great advice? discuss...

Well then, rather than withdraw, perhaps the solution is to look for a variation of the conditions.
For example, removing the requirement that the restrained person not live at or approach the PINOP's address,
but leaving thge other conditons in place.