MARSDEN & SIPOS

In *Marsden & Sipos*, Benjamin J of the Supreme Court of Victoria considered a dispute concerning the interpretation of a settlement agreement and its impact on a subsequent application for an apprehended violence order. The applicant, Ms. Marsden, sought an apprehended violence order against the respondent, Mr. Sipos. Mr. Sipos contended that the terms of a prior settlement agreement, entered into between himself and Ms. Marsden, precluded Ms. Marsden from pursuing the apprehended violence order.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the settlement agreement, which contained clauses relating to mutual undertakings and the resolution of disputes, operated as a bar to Ms. Marsden's application for an apprehended violence order. Specifically, the court had to determine if the agreement evinced a clear intention by the parties to forgo their right to seek protection under the *Family Violence Protection Act 2008* (Vic) in circumstances that might otherwise warrant such protection.

Benjamin J reasoned that while parties can contractually agree to resolve disputes and limit future actions, such agreements must be interpreted with caution, particularly when they touch upon statutory rights designed for personal safety. His Honour found that the settlement agreement, on its proper construction, did not contain an express or implied waiver of the right to seek an apprehended violence order. The court applied principles of contractual interpretation, emphasizing that a waiver of statutory rights must be clear and unequivocal. The court concluded that the agreement's terms did not extend to preventing Ms. Marsden from seeking statutory protection from family violence.

Consequently, Benjamin J dismissed Mr. Sipos's application to stay or dismiss Ms. Marsden's apprehended violence order proceedings based on the settlement agreement. The apprehended violence order proceedings were permitted to continue.