ISSUE 1
Are the current objects applicable to ADVOs appropriate?

Is the fact that the objects apply only to ADVOs beneficial, or does it detract from the overall effect of Part 15A?

Should the objects be made more general, yet still emphasise the special nature of domestic violence?

Chapter 4

ISSUE 2
Are AVOs an efficient and effective way of preventing violence, intimidation, stalking and harassment? Why or why not?

What general factors promote or hamper the effectiveness of AVOs?

Are these factors largely issues of implementation, or can they be addressed by amending Part 15A?

Chapter 5

ISSUE 3
What concerns are there about the use of ADVOs in family law matters?

Does the legislation sufficiently address those concerns? What improvements can be made?

ISSUE 4
How effective has the discretion to refuse to issue process in APVO matters been? Has it resulted in fewer “frivolous” applications?

ISSUE 5
Does the costs provision act as a deterrent against unmeritorious claims? Please give examples.

Should the costs provision be strengthened?

ISSUE 6
Should a filing fee be introduced for APVO matters? If so, in what circumstances?

What role should mediation have in the resolution of APVO disputes?

What other measures could be introduced to discourage unmeritorious or abusive APVO applications?

Should AVO legislation continue to provide for APVOs at all? If so, how?

Chapter 6

ISSUE 7
Should the AVO provisions continue to be located in the Crimes Act? Why or why not?

Should the AVO provisions be contained in separate, comprehensive legislation covering both ADVOs and APVOs? Why or why not?

What has been the effect of the split been between ADVOs and APVOs in Part 15A?

Should there be separate legislation covering only domestic violence? If so, should that legislation extend beyond ADVOs and take a comprehensive, holistic approach like the Domestic Violence Act 1995 (NZ)? Why or why not?

If separate domestic violence legislation were to be introduced, how should non-domestic violence be dealt with?

Chapter 7

ISSUE 8
Are the current definitions of domestic and personal violence offence adequate?

Should domestic and personal violence be better defined in Part 15A? How?

ISSUE 9
Is the current definition of domestic relationship adequate? If not, how should it be amended?

Chapter 8

ISSUE 10
Does Part 15A provide fair and effective access to AVOs?

How can procedures for applying for AVOs better reflect the objectives of Part 15A?

Should the provisions requiring authorised justices to explain the consequences of granting an AVO be clarified or expanded?

Do the AVOs provisions offer adequate protection in emergency situations?

ISSUE 11
How effective are the current provisions in Part 15A dealing with police applications for AVOs?

Should police have more or less discretion when applying for AVOs?

Should police discretion be more prescribed in AVO legislation?

Is the AVO application process more effective in stopping or preventing violence when police lay the complaint?

ISSUE 12
Given that the primary objective of Part 15A is to protect victims of violence, are the provisions relating to the withdrawal of AVO applications satisfactory?

Should the legislation require certain criteria to be satisfied before an application can be withdrawn?

If so, what should those criteria be?

Should police be able to proceed with an AVO application without the consent of the applicant in certain circumstances?

Chapter 9

ISSUE 13
What problems do some people experience in terms of gaining access to AVOs?

How can AVO legislation help to overcome those disadvantages?

Should third parties be able to apply for an AVO on behalf of people who may have difficulty making an application themselves? Why or why not?

Are the existing provisions in Part 15A aimed at safeguarding the interests and identity of children during the AVO process adequate?

Chapter 10

ISSUE 14
Should the legislation limit the duration of interim AVOs?

Should the grounds for an interim AVO be clarified?

Should an interim AVO automatically convert to a final order after a specified time period?

ISSUE 15
Are the provisions regarding TIOs sufficient to protect people experiencing violence?

Are the grounds for and terms of TIOs adequate?

Do TIOs adequately protect against damage to the applicant’s property?

ISSUE 16
Is the default duration of 6 months for a final order appropriate?

Are the grounds for a final order adequate?

Should the criteria in the legislation for obtaining an AVO be more specific? If so, how?

How workable and effective are the prohibitions and restrictions that may be included in an AVO?

ISSUE 17
Are the provisions allowing for AVOs to be made with the consent of both parties operating fairly and effectively?

Should clerks of the court be able to issue final AVOs by consent?

ISSUE 18
Are the current provisions relating to service effective?

ISSUE 19
Are the standard orders adequate? If not, how should they be revised?

Should the standard orders be incorporated as a schedule to the AVO legislation?

ISSUE 20
Are the circumstances in which the court must make an AVO appropriate?

Should the legislation be more specific about the factors the court must consider before making an order?

Should the legislation indicate how the factors should be weighted?

Should different factors be listed for consideration in applications for interim, telephone interim and final orders?

Chapter 11

ISSUE 21
Are the provisions relating to the breach of AVOs appropriate?

Are they adequately enforced?

Are the penalties for breaching an AVO appropriate?

Should there be defences to the breach provisions?

In particular, should consent be a defence?

Chapter 12

ISSUE 22
How can the legislation prevent unwarranted cross applications?

Is there a way of keeping police and courts informed of cross applications?

ISSUE 23
Is there a way of keeping police and courts informed of multiple applications?

Should the right to reapply for an order be limited, for example where an application has already been dismissed and the circumstances have not altered?

ISSUE 24
Are the provisions regarding variation and revocation of AVOs adequate? Why or why not?

Should police officers be allowed to apply for a variation regardless of who made the initial complaint?

Is it possible to safeguard against variation or revocation where the protected person has been threatened or coerced?

Should section 562F(8) be simplified, to provide that an application for extension can be made before the order expires?

Do the provisions dealing with variation and revocation provide adequate protection where more than one person is included on the order?

In what circumstances should defendants be able to apply to vary or revoke an AVO?

ISSUE 25
Is the appeals process satisfactory? If not, how can it be improved?

Chapter 13

ISSUE 26
How effective are the stalking and intimidation provisions in Part 15A in protecting people against acts or threats of violence?

Is the requisite intent, that the behaviour in question be “likely to cause fear of physical or mental harm”, appropriate?

Should the legislation include any defences or exclusions?

ISSUE 27
Should the offence of stalking or intimidation cover behaviour causing detriment or distress, or should it remain limited to behaviour causing fear?

Does the legislation draw an appropriate line between nuisance behaviour, which is annoying but lawful, and criminal conduct?