Police v Giles

In the matter of Police v Giles, the South Australian Supreme Court was called upon to review a decision made by a Magistrate, concerning the refusal to confirm an interim intervention order. The applicant, represented by the police, sought the order on behalf of Ms M, who alleged that the defendant, her former partner, had engaged in a pattern of abusive and violent conduct. The key issues revolved around the interpretation of the term "trivial" emotional harm, and the level of suspicion required to justify an intervention order.

The court had to determine whether the Magistrate's decision to not confirm the interim order was legally sound. Specifically, the court needed to assess whether the Magistrate correctly applied the relevant legal criteria when considering the evidence presented. The central question was whether the Magistrate erred in finding that there was insufficient evidence to suspect that the defendant would commit an act of abuse resulting in more than trivial emotional harm.

The Supreme Court found that the Magistrate had indeed erred in his decision. The court held that the Magistrate failed to properly consider the evidence of past incidents of abuse, which were relevant to the nature of the relationship and the degree of anxiety Ms M might feel about future acts of abuse. The court emphasised that the Magistrate’s role was to resolve the evidential disputes, which he failed to do. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Magistrate’s decision and directing that the interim intervention order be confirmed.