Our firm represented a young father in proceedings before the Local Court arising from allegations of stalk/intimidate contrary to section 13 of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), together with a subsequent alleged breach of an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO). The matter unfolded against the backdrop of ongoing parenting and property proceedings, which our firm was concurrently managing.

The original ADVO arose following a domestic dispute concerning parenting time. Police alleged that our client engaged in intimidating conduct, including raising his voice, following the complainant after she withdrew to a bedroom, and forcing entry by manipulating a locked door. It was further alleged that he made statements of self-harm and struck furniture in a manner said to cause fear. An ADVO was subsequently made.

Critically, our client had accepted the ADVO at an early stage without obtaining legal advice and without fully appreciating the implications of the order on his employment and his role as a father.

The matter presented layered legal complexity. The original allegations were disputed and ultimately defended, with the prosecution relying on multiple witnesses, including family members who claimed to have overheard the incident while on the telephone. Issues arose as to reliability, context, and whether the alleged conduct met the statutory threshold for intimidation.

More significantly, our client was later charged with breaching the ADVO after responding to text messages from his former partner. While the communication was not initiated by our client, it nevertheless constituted a technical breach of the order.

The consequences were immediate and severe. The mother sought to restrict our client’s time with the children to supervised contact only, departing from the previously agreed shared care arrangement. The allegation placed our client’s employment at risk, which required security clearance and could be impacted by any finding of breach. Further, the existence of both the ADVO and the breach allegation had the potential to significantly prejudice our client’s position in the ongoing family law proceedings.

We adopted an integrated strategy addressing both the criminal proceedings and their intersection with parenting outcomes.

In relation to the substantive stalk/intimidate charge, we undertook a detailed proof of evidence process. Through careful analysis of the prosecution material and targeted cross-examination, we exposed inconsistencies in the witnesses’ accounts and demonstrated that the prosecution could not establish the requisite intention to intimidate beyond reasonable doubt. Properly characterised, the evidence reflected a heated domestic disagreement rather than criminal conduct.

In relation to the alleged breach, we advanced submissions that:

• the communication was not initiated by our client;
• the breach was technical in nature and did not involve any threat, intimidation, or risk to safety; and
• our client had no history of violence and posed no ongoing risk to the complainant or the children.

We further emphasised our client’s role as a committed and present father, and the disproportionate consequences that would flow from any adverse finding, particularly in the context of parenting proceedings and employment requirements.

Concurrently, through our family law practice, we worked with our client to re-establish constructive arrangements with the mother, focusing on the best interests of the children and the restoration of a workable shared care regime.

Following the defended hearing, the Court found our client not guilty of the charge of stalk/intimidate and dismissed the allegation.

In respect of the alleged breach, the matter was resolved without conviction, with the Court accepting that the conduct did not give rise to any safety concerns.

Importantly, the ADVO did not operate as an ongoing barrier to our client’s relationship with his children, allowing for the continuation and restoration of meaningful parenting arrangements.

This outcome had critical ramifications beyond the criminal proceedings. By successfully defending both the substantive allegation and the breach, we preserved our client’s employment and professional standing, prevented the imposition of restrictive supervised parenting arrangements, and supported the restoration of a shared care arrangement, providing stability and continuity for the children.

The case underscores the significant interplay between domestic violence proceedings and family law outcomes. Allegations, even where ultimately unproven or technical in nature, can have profound consequences for parenting, employment, and personal stability.

A coordinated legal strategy, grounded in rigorous evidence analysis, strategic advocacy, and a clear understanding of both criminal and family law frameworks, was essential in securing a just and holistic outcome for our client.