The relationship between Intervention Orders and Parenting Orders

In South Australia, a violence prevention order is known as an Intervention Order. Intervention Orders are made under the Intervention Orders (Prevention of Abuse) Act 2009. Such Orders are made in the State jurisdiction in the local Magistrates Court with the view of protecting and prohibiting any acts of abuse, intimidation or harassment. The question to be determined at trial is ‘Is it reasonable to suspect that the defendant will, without intervention, commit an act of abuse against a person, and is the issuing of an order appropriate in the circumstances?’ The Magistrates Court must take steps necessary so as to avoid any inconsistency between the Intervention Order and any family law Order.
A Parenting Order made in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (“FCFCOA”) is made at a Commonwealth level for the purpose of setting out parenting arrangements such as who the children live with on a fortnightly basis. Where there are inconsistencies between the Magistrates Court issued Intervention Order and the FCFCOA Parenting Orders, the Parenting Order will prevail.

The Court must take into account any relevant orders made by the FCFCOA pursuant to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) when considering whether to make, and the terms of, an Intervention Order.

In the event that an Intervention Order is issued with the child listed as a protected person, this does not necessarily prohibit the defendant from applying to the FCFCOA for Orders for Parenting Orders. The primary consideration of the FCFCOA is supporting a meaningful relationship between both parents and the protection of the child from harm, or the risk of harm. The FCFCOA will make an assessment as to what is in the best interest of the child based on the evidence put before it such as an Affidavit setting out the circumstances surrounding the need for the Intervention Order, allegations of family violence, and any other safety concerns.
The terms of the Intervention Order may stipulate that there is no contact between the protected person and the defendant except through mediation or a legal representative – this would allow the defendant named in the Intervention Order to initiate the process seeking Parenting Orders by engaging in Family Dispute Resolution (“FDR”). However, you may qualify for an exemption to the FDR process based on family violence or risk of family violence.
Contact Culshaw Bishop Lawyers to discuss your circumstances and whether FDR is appropriate, or whether an application to the FCFCOA for Parenting Orders is the best course of action.

It is common for a parent to not disclose their new address or relocate without the other parent’s knowledge in attempt to severe a relationship between the child and the parent. This conduct creates difficulties in the police performing welfare checks and commencing the process for reaching time spending arrangements.
Family Dispute Resolution (“FDR”) is a pre-action step required prior to commencing court proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (“the Court”) for time spending arrangements. To invite the other parent to participate in FDR, the address of the other parent is required. There are limited exemptions to participating in FDR however if an exemption applies and you are able to apply to the Court an address would be required to serve the initiating documents.
Before applying to the Court, the Court will want to see that you have made all reasonable attempts to locate the other parent. This could include a combination of the following:

1. Inspecting the electoral roll
2. Sending correspondence to the last known address,
3. Contacting family and friends via social media platforms or
4. Requesting such details if you have the other parents mobile number.

If there is a family violence order in place with a no contact condition, this would create difficulty in obtaining such information.
If all reasonable attempts have been made without success, the parent seeking time spending can apply to the Court seeking a Commonwealth information order or location order.
A location Order is an order made by a court requiring a person to provide the Court with information that the person has or obtains about the child’s location.
A Commonwealth information order is a type of location order which requires the Secretary of a Commonwealth (Federal) Government department, or an authority of a Commonwealth instrumentality, to provide to the Court information in its records about the location of a child. A Commonwealth information order would require Commonwealth departments such as services Australia (Medicare, Centrelink or the child support agency) to produce to the Court the contact details of the other parent to assist in the whereabouts of the child.
Contact our Culshaw Bishop Lawyers to discuss the process of seeking location orders.

The South Australian real estate market remains one of the most stable markets in Australia with the strongest appreciated market and lowest decline in value.
With the unpredictability of the market, it is often difficult reaching an agreement as to the estimated value of the property and there is the inherent risk that the property may be under or over valued in property matters.
Although realestate.com.au offers some guidance on the capital growth of the suburb and the sales of similar dwellings, internet estimates are unreliable and should not be relied upon. This is akin to market appraisals prepared by real estate agents in addition to their self-serving interests.
In property proceedings, the property’s value needs to be agreed. If an agreement cannot be reached, a formal valuation should be obtained. Formal valuations are considered as providing accurate values of property as a detailed analysis of the property is undertaken and the value is based on a “fair market value”. An updated valuation can be sought if some time has passed between the valuation being prepared and the hearing or trial and a party suspects that the valuation no longer reflects the current market value.
If the value remains in dispute, the valuer can be cross-examined in trial as a single expert witness. The accountability and credibility of a valuer is one of the reasons a valuer is a feasible option. Although a trial judge does not profess to being qualified in assessing the value of the property they have the power to identify and value, as far as the evidence would allow, the parties’ existing legal and equitable property interests.