On what grounds may a court hear a victim protection order case together with a family protection case, and must it do so?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In practice material of this kind, we check the papers naming the alleged family violence offender and the victim in each case, the documents linking both cases to the same incident, and any application or ruling on hearing them together.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading states the power as the provision writes it: the court may consolidate a victim protection order case and a family protection case where the family violence offender, or the victim, is the same person in both, or where otherwise the relevance of the cases is established and hearing them together is needed; the word 'may' leaves the decision with the court.
Another reading presses on the second ground: it asks for more than a link between the two cases, since relevance must be recognised and a necessity for hearing them together found, and the provision sets out neither what shows that necessity nor whether a party may put such a request before the court.
Your judgment
What in the papers of a file would show why hearing the two cases together is necessary rather than merely convenient?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We revisit this card if the provision is amended to make consolidation compulsory, to add a further ground, or to set out a procedure for requesting it, or if a court decision explains what relevance and necessity require.