Everyone has experienced being offended by the actions of another at some point in their lives. People may sometimes go too far, shouting obscenities or threatening to disclose things without meaning to. In the context of harassment, the issue is whether the conduct of another constitutes “harassment” within the terms of the legislation.
According to the law, the term “harassment” has a very restrictive meaning. Simple disrespectful or impolite behaviour is not always grounds for a reprimand from a higher authority on best family law attorney mn.
Requirements Must Be Met:
- Physical assault or sexual assault committed in a single instance; For example, one single episode of non-consensual publication of private sexual pictures;
- Unwanted, repeated words, actions, or gestures that have a major unfavourable impact (or are intended to have a substantial adverse effect) on the safety, security, or privacy of another are referred to as repeated (unwanted) threats.
- The first two actions that may result in an HRO are rather basic in their execution. Nevertheless, it has been my observation that the great majority of harassment situations fall under the category of “repeated actions.” In such a case, the judge’s primary concern is whether or not someone’s safety, security, or privacy has been jeopardised in any way.
It is doubtful that a harassment restraining order would be issued based just on the fact that you were offended by another’s acts without further evidence. If a petitioning party, for example, does not feel secure in their own house – or if their e-mail account has been hacked – the court is more interested in the situation.
Procedurally, an HRO case starts with the filing of a Petition without the opposing party being notified of its existence. When a court finds that the claims are accurate and that they meet the legal definition of harassment, it will issue a temporary restraining order against the defendant. The party who has been served with the order is given the option to contest it.