District Court of North Holland
8 June 2020, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2020:4118
The man had been given a chance by the judge a week earlier. But he violated the previous restraining order. Now he gets not only a restraining order, but also a street injuction order, both with a penalty of € 200,- a day, with a maximum of € 2.000,-. Moreover, the judge stipulates that the woman may call in the police if the man does not comply with the restraining order or the street injuction order.
Initial interlocutory proceedings
A week earlier, the woman had demanded a restraining order in the first preliminary relief proceedings. The reason for this was that the man frequently sent voice messages to the woman which she found threatening. This was confirmed by the employee of Veilig Thuis who was present at the hearing. According to the woman, the children now do not want contact with the man.
The man has agreed to a restraining order for a period of 3 months, on condition that no penalty payment would be attached. Indeed, the court did not impose a penalty payment at that time.
Almost immediately after that, the man violated the restraining order. He sent voice messages again and left notes in the mailbox of her house. That is why she is now claiming a restraining order in the second preliminary relief proceedings.
Balance of interests
The court weighs the interests of the parties against each other. The woman and the children have an interest in being safe in their own environment. The husband has an interest in being able to move freely in the place of residence. The husband’s family also lives nearby.
In order for such a drastic measure to be granted, there must be a high degree of plausible facts and circumstances that can justify such an infringement.
The court concludes that the first judgment did not make much impression on the man. Because his cross-border behaviour continues, a street injuction order is necessary.
Due to the fact that the man wants to be able to visit his family, the restraining order is limited to a radius of 100 meters around the woman’s house. The court finds a period of 3 months proportional. The court pronounces directly orally (art. 30p Code of Civil Procedure).
The man had asked the judge to limit the penalty to € 25,- per violation. The court found that a penalty payment should hurt a bit and imposed a penalty of € 200 at a time, with a maximum of € 2,000. The woman is again authorised, to enforce the court decision with the help of the police.
The court determines that each party must pay its own litigation costs.
What does this ruling mean?
You should not expect too much from a restraining order or street injunction order. It is only given for a short period of time. Often it is given in small steps and the perpetrator is given another chance, several times, before real action is taken. However, doing nothing is not an option. Building a file is the most sensible choice.