Over 50 years of combined experience

Success in Courts Australia-Wide

3 x Convenient Locations across Sydney

Your options

Plead not guilty

In order to be convicted of this offence, the police must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

  1. You contravened a prohibition or restriction specified in an Apprehended Violence Order made against you.
  2. The contravention was done or made knowingly.

If any of the above elements cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt, then you will be found not guilty of the offence.

If the above elements can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, you will still be found not guilty if any of the following defences can be established:

Our experienced criminal lawyers will advise you of your prospects of successfully defending any charge brought against you and fight to have you found not guilty of the offence.

Plead guilty

If you agree with what the police are alleging against you, the way to get the best result is often to plead guilty as it demonstrates remorse and contrition as well as meaning that you will be entitled to a discount on your sentence.

The offence of Contravening an Apprehended Violence Order carries a maximum penalty of a fine of $5,500.00 and/or 2 years imprisonment. However, Contravening an Apprehended Violence Order is an offence that is often dealt with pursuant to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentence Procedure) Act, meaning no conviction will be recorded, there is no other penalty and you will have no criminal record. To find out more about a section 10, click here.

Generally, penalties that a court can impose for any criminal offence in NSW are:

Our client was charged with breaching the terms of the AVO which was taken against him to protect his ex-partner. Our client had sent a number of harassing text messages to his ex-partner which was a breach of the AVO.

Our client was also on two section 9 good behaviour bonds for an assault occasioning actually bodily harm and another for the offence of using carriage service to threaten to kill the same victim. The harassing conduct which constituted the breach of the AVO occurred only three weeks after the date the section 9 bonds and AVO were ordered.

One of our solicitors travelled to Wollongong Local Court and argued that the breach was a minor breach and should be dealt with by way of a conviction with no further penalty. The court agreed.

In relation to the breach of the two section 9 good behaviour bonds, the Court was of the view that the bonds should be revoked and community service should be imposed.

Our solicitor argued strongly against the imposition of a community service order and sough that the bonds be revoked and the client being place on fresh section 9 good behaviour bonds.

The Magistrate agreed with our solicitors submissions. The client was placed on two fresh section 9 good behaviour bonds and escaped a community service order.

Our client was very happy with the result, and very fortunate that a heavier penalty, such as community service, was not imposed.

Our client faced a charge of Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO. In addition our client was on a suspended sentence of imprisonment – this meaning a conviction in relation to the breach would potentially trigger an immediate gaol term.

The complainant sought to rely on ‘controversial’ photographic evidence and we advised our client to proceed to a hearing.

Our lawyer successfully challenged Police officers on their conduct in relation to the investigation in particular their ‘one sided and biased’ approach to the complaint.

The complainant was tested on their evidence by our lawyer and was shown to have failed to mention things in Court that they had stated to Police earlier and also mentioning things in court for the first time.

Arguments were made for our client in relation to the quality of the prosecution evidence despite the photographs produced and also as to the ‘honesty and accuracy’ of the complainants. The Magistrate was persuaded that the Police had not proved their case and withdrew the charge.

Our client faced a charge of Contravene prohibition/restriction in AVO. In addition our client was on a suspended sentence of imprisonment – this meaning a conviction in relation to the breach would potentially trigger an immediate gaol term.

The complainant sought to rely on ‘controversial’ photographic evidence and we advised our client to proceed to a hearing.

Our lawyer successfully challenged Police officers on their conduct in relation to the investigation in particular their ‘one sided and biased’ approach to the complaint.

The complainant was tested on their evidence by our lawyer and was shown to have failed to mention things in Court that they had stated to Police earlier and also mentioning things in court for the first time.

Arguments were made for our client in relation to the quality of the prosecution evidence despite the photographs produced and also as to the ‘honesty and accuracy’ of the complainants. The Magistrate was persuaded that the Police had not proved their case and withdrew the charge.

Our client had an AVO in place against him that included that he not contact the victim by any means.

During the course of the AVO period, it was alleged that our client breached the AVO more than 100 times, by sending harassing emails to the victim.

We negotiated with the prosecution to reduce the number of emails sent to the victim, ultimately reducing the number of breaches to 40. Our client then pleaded guilty to an amended set of facts.

The matter appeared before Magistrate Holdsworth at Liverpool Local Court in May 2015. Our client’s case was diligently prepared with supporting evidence to argue his Section 10 application. This included character witness evidence, those of who also attended court on the day of sentencing. Also was evidence of overseas work travel, that which would not be possible if with a criminal conviction.

Ms. Holdsworth agreed with our submission, and proceeded to place our client on a Section 10 good behaviour bond.