Goldsmith Paul; O'Connor GregVICTIMS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE (STRENGTHENING LEGAL PROTECTIONS) LEGISLATION BILLSecond ReadingHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice): I present a legislative statement on the Victims of Family Violence (Strengthening Legal Protections) Legislation Bill.DEPUTY SPEAKER: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: I move That the Victims of Family Violence (Strengthening Legal Protections) Legislation Bill be now read a second time. This bill will strengthen the courts' statutory powers to protect victims of litigation abuse in family proceedings. The bill was introduced by the previous Government in August 2023 and this Government in the spirit of bipartisanship has adopted it. The bill has been considered by the Justice Committee and it recommends that it be passed with amendments to a number of clauses which I support in full. I thank the members of the committee for their thorough consideration; a committee led by my colleague James Meager who's done a great job. I understand that the Justice Committee received 21 written submissions on the bill and heard seven oral submissions. These submissions were from people and organisations with valuable and varied experience related to family violence and the court system. I thank them for their insights and for taking the time to submit to the committee. The resulting changes have I believe strengthened the bill in line with its purpose. I'd like to briefly talk about what litigation abuse is the harm it causes and the objectives of the bill. Litigation abuse is where someone uses the court system to harass contact and control their victim rather than to resolve legitimate disputes. This can include making false allegations and filing excessive documents with the intention to hurt their victim in some way. For example they may seek to control their victim's time through responding to court applications or cause financial harm through incurring legal costs. They may intend to humiliate to hurt or to continue to force contact with them.The Government is committed to ensuring the proper and effective use of the court system. The courts are there to resolve disputes when parties are unable to and to uphold the rule of law. The misuse of the courts process to deliberately prolong a dispute to harass to harm or to otherwise abuse somebody is the absolute antithesis of this purpose. This misuse is even more disturbing when it impacts children which is often the case in the context of family proceedings. I think everybody in the House in their interactions with their constituents and their community will be aware of cases such as this where it's happened where our families have been torn asunder and proceedings have been dragged out to the detriment of one party and those close to them. So the purpose of the Victims of Family Violence (Strengthening Legal Protections) Legislation Bill is to strengthen the courts' ability to respond to litigation abuse. It does this by amending the Family Court Act District Court Act and Senior Courts Act to include new provisions targeting litigant abuse in family proceedings. The new provisions will allow the court to make an order where a broad view of the conduct both in and out of court proceedings shows someone is engaging in litigant abuse in a family proceeding. If an order is made the court will require a party to obtain leave of the court to take any further steps in existing or indeed in new family proceedings. This will give the courts a tool to protect victims from being abused through the court process. An order will last for a period of up to three years and may last for up to five years in extraordinary circumstances.I'll come now to the recommendations of the select committee. The select committee has recommended refinements to the bill to ensure the new provision better recognises the impact of litigation abuse on victims. In response to submitters' comments the revised bill focuses on the harm to the targeted party rather than focusing on this behaviour for being an abuse of the court's process. I just want to reiterate that: the bill focuses on the harm to the targeted party rather than focusing on the behaviour being an abuse of the court's process. While litigation abuse will often amount to an abuse of the court the focus on the victim better reflects the intention of the bill: to protect people from abuse in the context of court proceedings.The revised bill provides protections that are accessible to victims while also signalling the serious nature of litigation abuse. Submitters told the committee that requiring the behaviour in court to be intended to harass and annoy" the party may trivialise the serious nature of litigation abuse experienced by victims. The benefits of defining the behaviour narrowly to indicate the serious nature needs to be balanced against the risk that it will become more difficult for the victim to assess the new protection. The changes recommended by the committee respond to this by (1) expanding the definition of litigant abuse to include behaviour intended to harass annoy or to harm another party to the proceeding or that amounts to psychological abuse and (2) including further clarification that conduct is intended to capture situations where a pattern of behaviour amounts to litigant abuse. Together these changes better reflect the intention of the bill. The amended language allows for a broad range of behaviour to be captured while also recognising the seriousness of the abuse experienced by victims. They also clarify that the wellbeing and best interests of the child are paramount where they may be affected.Finally technical changes make it clear the bill provides an additional process in cases of litigation abuse but other processes that relate to vexatious litigation remain. A party may engage in conduct that is vexatious—for example because they are a self-represented litigant with limited knowledge of the process—without intending to abuse another party to the proceedings. Subsequent to the select committee reporting back a minor and technical amendment has been made to be clear of that to clarify the policy intent and simplify the references used throughout the bill. This is contained in an Amendment Paper that was tabled on 9 August.I want to come finally to protections in the bill. I want to address the concerns the select committee heard about the provisions in the bill being used to limit access to the courts by victims. To ensure access to justice and natural justice rights are preserved and that the new provision is used properly there are a number of safeguards in the bill. These are (1) for an order to be made the judge must be satisfied that conduct within the proceedings is litigant abuse; (2) a judge retains discretion about whether to make an order; (3) an order does not prevent a party from taking further steps and proceedings it requires that the courts review any further steps that person takes in the family proceeding or any new family proceedings they initiate to ensure that they are appropriate before allowing them to proceed; and (4) the decision to grant an order is itself able to be appealed.I want to thank the organisations and people who took the time to share their experiences with litigant abuse. Their insights informed the changes made to this bill which have improved it considerably. I acknowledge that many submissions related to substantial or general changes to the family justice system were beyond this bill's scope. The Ministry of Justice has a multi-year work programme under way that aims to ensure people affected by family violence and sexual violence feel safe supported and are well-informed in their interactions with the ministry. To protect the core purpose and prevent misuse our courts need appropriate statutory powers to prevent victims being forced into ongoing relationship with their abuser through court proceedings and this bill supports that. Thank you Mr Speaker. I recommend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the motion be agreed to."