Seeking domestic violence order against wife not ‘a convenient way’ of getting back into family home, says judge

A judge has told a man that seeking a domestic violence order against his wife is not “a convenient way” of getting back into the family home.

Judge Gerard Furlong told the man, who was seeking a protection order against his wife, that his safety was not at risk and refused the application at Dublin District Family Court.

In a sworn statement to the court, the man said he and his wife had bought a home together last year but he had only lived there for a very short time and had moved out due to problems the couple were experiencing.

The man told the court he had since been renting but the landlord was now selling the property and he wanted to move back into the family home.

Supermarket wines: Two great Italian wines to try

---

Brendan O’Connor brings his contrary streak to a cosy conversation about immigration

---

John FitzGerald: An attempt to buy the next election with a giveaway budget would be a gross miscalculation

---

US student protests: Democrats are worried this is 1968 again

---

The man said his wife is living in the home with some of her family and they told him he wasn’t allowed in the house.

He said he went to the home in recent days to move over his stuff and his wife was “abusing” him, and said ‘go f****** live with your mother’.

The man said his wife’s sister also pushed him out of the property.

Judge Furlong told the man he should go to the gardaí regarding the woman’s sister and the court couldn’t grant an order against her as he had not been living with her.

The judge said the man was the joint-owner of the home and he could go there, adding “that’s the law”.

“That’s not what these [domestic violence] orders are for,” Judge Furlong said. “If there is a serious, imminent risk to your safety, I can give you a protection order, it is not a convenient way of getting you back into the house or providing you with some ammunition to get back into the house.”

Judge Furlong said the man did not need a protection order and he was entitled to be in the family home. He advised the man to speak with his solicitor about the potential for securing an injunction in the circuit court against the woman’s family members and actions to enforce his property rights.

The judge said he was refusing the order and that “this is not what this court is about, your safety is not at risk”.

In a separate case before the court, a couple secured a three-year barring order against their adult son. The couple said in a previous sworn statement that they are “terrified” of their son and there had been a history of abuse for the last 20 years or so.

“At one point he grabbed my neck and held me at knifepoint,” the statement said.

The couple said while “things had settled down” for a period, the situation had escalated in recent weeks and their son was drinking heavily and smoking hash.

The court heard that an interim barring order had been granted earlier this month but the man had breached it, and turned up at his parent’s home and sent abusive messages.

The couple said they were afraid their son would hurt or injure them “or worse, take a knife to us again”.

“We really can’t let him back into our home,” they said.

The couple’s son did not attend the hearing despite the judge being satisfied that he was aware of it.

Judge Furlong granted the couple a three-year barring order against their son and included a recommendation that he undertake an addiction and counselling service.

A barring order excludes the couple’s son from their home and from carrying out violence or threats of violence, and from watching or being near the home.

The judge said if circumstances changed the couple were welcome to come back to the court to alter or lift the order.

• Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
• Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
• Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here