Professional Experience
Kristina regularly appears in a broad range of criminal and traffic cases, including:
- Bail applications to the Local, District, and Supreme Courts of New South Wales,
- Sentencing proceedings in the Local and District Courts of New South Wales,
- Complex Local Court defended hearing,
- Domestic violence matters (including apprehended violence orders),
- Serious sexual violence matters,
- White collar crimes,
- Complex drug supply and possession crimes,
- Applications pursuant to s 14 and 19 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) (formerly known as s 32 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990),
- All manner of appeals, including licence appeals in the Local Court, severity and conviction appeals in the District Court, and
- Indictable matters.
Background
With a solid foundation in legal education and training, Kristina has assisted in various capacities and her experience includes preparation for cases ranging from drink driving, assault, and traffic matters, as well as s 14 applications.
Kristina’s approach to criminal law is defined by empathy, coupled with a strong desire to secure the best possible outcome for clients. She is results-focused, regardless of the circumstances and without judgement. She has a genuine interest in the distinctive aspects of each case, recognising the importance of a personalised approach in the pursuit of justice.
In her spare time, Kristina loves to travel, and enjoys reading and crochet.
Results
Our client appeared before the Court charged with common assault, an offence under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) carrying a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment.
Although common assault is considered a lower-level violence offence, it remains a criminal charge that can have significant consequences. A conviction can affect employment, professional licences, travel opportunities, and personal reputation. Many clients are particularly concerned about the long-term impact of a criminal record.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the evidence, obtained detailed instructions, and advised the client regarding the best approach to the matter.
Kristina Batkovska then prepared strong subjective material for the Court dealing with the client’s background, prior history, remorse, and future prospects. Detailed submissions were made seeking leniency and asking the Court not to record a conviction.
After considering all of the circumstances, the Court imposed a Conditional Release Order without conviction.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, allowing the client to move forward without a criminal record.
Why this result matters: Even in assault matters, strong preparation and effective advocacy can lead to outcomes that protect a client’s future.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client came before the Court seeking to appeal the cancellation of a P2 provisional driver licence.
For many younger drivers, losing a licence can have immediate and serious consequences. A licence is often essential for getting to work, attending university or TAFE, supporting family responsibilities, and maintaining day-to-day independence. A cancellation can also disrupt career plans and place significant pressure on a young person at an important stage of life.
P2 licence appeals can be challenging matters and require the Court to be persuaded that the original decision should be overturned.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the client’s circumstances, traffic history, and need for a licence. Detailed supporting material was prepared addressing employment needs, personal hardship, and future prospects.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska made persuasive oral submissions seeking that the cancellation be set aside and the client be permitted to continue driving.
After considering the evidence and submissions, the Court allowed the appeal.
As a result, the client was able to retain driving privileges and avoid the significant disruption that would have followed a licence cancellation.
Why this result matters: For provisional licence holders, a successful appeal can protect employment, study, and independence. Early legal advice and strong preparation are often crucial.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client brought an appeal before the Court seeking to challenge an earlier decision affecting their licence.
Licence appeals are often critical because the ability to drive can directly affect employment, family responsibilities, education, and day-to-day independence. Many clients face significant hardship if they are unable to drive.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska reviewed the relevant history, prepared supporting evidence, and developed strong submissions in support of the appeal.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska argued that the original decision should be set aside and that the client should be permitted to retain driving privileges.
After considering the evidence and submissions, the Court allowed the appeal.
As a result, the client was able to retain or regain their licence and avoid the serious consequences associated with ongoing suspension or cancellation.
Why this result matters: Prompt legal advice and careful preparation can make a significant difference in licence appeal matters.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court charged with common assault, an offence carrying a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment in New South Wales.
Common assault matters are taken seriously by the Courts. Even where no significant injury is alleged, a conviction can create long-term difficulties for employment, licensing, travel, and reputation.
The client sought urgent legal assistance to place themselves in the best possible position before sentence.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the facts, obtained instructions, and prepared favourable material to present to the Court.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska made persuasive submissions focusing on the client’s circumstances, remorse, prior history, and rehabilitation.
The Court dealt with the matter by way of a Conditional Release Order without conviction.
As a result, no criminal conviction was recorded.
Why this result matters: A no-conviction outcome can have lasting benefits for a client’s career, reputation, and future opportunities.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court charged with common assault, an offence under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) carrying a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment.
Although often regarded as a lower-level assault offence, common assault is still a criminal offence that can have serious consequences. A conviction can affect employment, professional licences, travel opportunities, reputation, and future dealings with police or the Courts.
Our client was deeply concerned about avoiding a criminal record and protecting future opportunities.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the prosecution material, obtained detailed instructions, and advised the client on the best pathway forward.
Kristina Batkovska then prepared comprehensive subjective material for the Court, including matters relevant to the client’s background, remorse, insight, and future prospects. Detailed submissions were made seeking leniency and asking the Court to deal with the matter without recording a conviction.
After considering all of the circumstances, the Court imposed a Conditional Release Order without conviction.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, allowing the client to move forward without a criminal record.
Why this result matters: Even in assault matters, careful preparation and strong advocacy can result in the Court exercising leniency and avoiding a conviction.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Drive While Visiting Driver Privileges Withdrawn – No Conviction Recorded at Fairfield Local Court
Our client appeared before the Court charged with driving while visiting driver privileges were withdrawn, a serious driving offence that can carry fines, future licensing complications, and negative impacts on a person’s ability to lawfully drive in New South Wales.
These matters often arise where a person is driving on interstate or overseas licence arrangements and is alleged to have lost the right to drive within NSW. Many clients are unaware of the complexity of the relevant rules until they are charged.
A conviction for this type of offence can create ongoing issues with future licence applications, insurance, and employment opportunities for clients who rely on driving.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the charge, advised the client regarding the applicable law, and prepared detailed subjective material for the Court.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska made submissions seeking leniency, highlighting the client’s need to drive, personal circumstances, and the importance of avoiding a conviction.
After hearing submissions, the Court imposed a Conditional Release Order without conviction.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, significantly reducing the long-term impact of the matter on the client’s driving future.
Why this result matters: Driving offences of this kind can create ongoing practical problems. Strong preparation and effective advocacy can lead to outcomes that protect a client’s future.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court for proceeding through a red traffic light, a traffic offence that can attract significant penalties including a substantial fine, demerit points, and in some cases serious consequences for a person’s driver licence if they already have an adverse traffic history.
Many drivers underestimate the impact of red light offences. In addition to financial penalties, the accumulation of demerit points can place a licence at risk of suspension. For professional drivers or those who rely on their licence for family responsibilities, the consequences can be significant.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the circumstances of the offence, obtained instructions from the client, and prepared detailed material in support of leniency.
Kristina Batkovska then made persuasive submissions to the Court focusing on the client’s prior history, need for a licence, remorse, and the disproportionate consequences that would flow from a conviction.
After considering all of the circumstances, the Court dealt with the matter by way of a Conditional Release Order without conviction.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, allowing the client to avoid the stigma of a criminal finding while limiting the broader impact of the matter.
Why this result matters: Even traffic offences can have meaningful consequences. Early legal advice and strong preparation can place a client in the best position to achieve a no-conviction outcome.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court charged with using a carriage service to menace, harass or offend, a Commonwealth offence commonly involving text messages, phone calls, emails, or social media communications.
This offence is treated seriously and carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. A conviction can also have significant consequences for employment, reputation, and future opportunities.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the evidence, advised the client on available options, and prepared persuasive material focusing on rehabilitation, personal circumstances, and future prospects.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska made strong submissions seeking leniency and a non-conviction outcome.
The Court dealt with the matter by way of a Conditional Release Order without conviction.
As a result, no conviction was recorded.
Why this result matters: Commonwealth offences can have serious consequences. Avoiding a conviction can be critical for a client’s future.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court charged with steal from a dwelling house, a serious dishonesty offence under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). This offence carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment, reflecting the seriousness with which the law treats theft committed inside a person’s home.
Allegations of stealing from a dwelling house can have lasting consequences. A conviction for dishonesty can affect employment opportunities, professional licences, visa applications, travel prospects, and personal reputation. For many clients, avoiding a criminal record is critically important.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the prosecution material, obtained detailed instructions from the client, and prepared strong subjective evidence for the Court. This included material directed to the client’s background, remorse, insight, and future prospects.
Kristina Batkovska then made detailed submissions seeking leniency and urging the Court to deal with the matter without recording a conviction.
After considering all of the circumstances, the Court imposed a Conditional Release Order without conviction.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, allowing the client to move forward without the burden of a criminal record.
Why this result matters: Dishonesty offences can carry serious long-term consequences. Strong preparation and effective advocacy can make a substantial difference to the final outcome.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court facing charges of intentionally or recklessly destroy or damage property, negligent driving, and fail to give particulars to another driver arising from a road incident on the Pacific Highway.
Police alleged that after an earlier collision and verbal exchange, our client intentionally followed another motorist before striking the side mirror of the other vehicle as he rode past on his motorbike.
The allegations were serious because, if accepted, they suggested deliberate retaliation and intimidation. This would have increased the objective seriousness of the matter and potentially affected the penalty imposed by the Court.
Our client was 37 years old, married, the father of a one-year-old daughter, with no criminal antecedents and only a limited traffic history. His primary concern was avoiding a licence disqualification, which would have significantly impacted his family and daily responsibilities.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska reviewed the charge papers, obtained detailed instructions, and identified that the police facts did not fully reflect the circumstances.
Kristina Batkovska then secured dashcam footage from the officer in charge and sent detailed representations seeking amendment of the facts. Those representations were accepted, establishing that after the initial argument the parties had coincidentally come across each other again, rather than the client intentionally pursuing the other driver.
This significantly reduced the client’s moral culpability and changed the way the matter was viewed by the Court.
As a result, the Court imposed a Conditional Release Order without conviction for 12 months on the destroy/damage property offence.
For the negligent driving and fail to give particulars offences, convictions were recorded with a $520 fine, however no licence disqualification was imposed.
Why this result matters: By carefully reviewing the evidence and successfully negotiating amended facts, the most serious aspects of the prosecution case were reduced. This allowed the client to avoid a conviction for the property damage offence and keep his licence.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court charged with driving with an illicit drug present in oral fluid, blood or urine after police alleged he was stopped for exceeding the speed limit and subsequently returned positive indications for cocaine and cannabis.
Police also alleged a reading of 0.049 for alcohol, resulting in an immediate suspension relating to the drink driving matter, while the drug driving offence proceeded to Court.
Drug driving offences can result in criminal findings, fines, and licence disqualification. For this client, the consequences were particularly serious. He was only 18 years old, had no criminal antecedents, limited traffic history, and was working while also enrolled in a TAFE course.
The client’s cannabis use was connected to an undiagnosed back condition, later suspected to involve autoimmune arthritis. His existing licence suspension had already made travelling to work and TAFE significantly more difficult. Any further disqualification or conviction would have created major obstacles at an important stage of his life.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska reviewed the charge papers, obtained detailed instructions from the client, and advised on the subjective material required to present the strongest possible case.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska made submissions emphasising the client’s youth, employment, ongoing studies, medical circumstances, and the disproportionate hardship that a conviction or further disqualification would cause.
After considering the evidence and submissions, the Court dealt with the matter by way of a Conditional Release Order without conviction for 9 months with standard conditions.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, and no additional disqualification was imposed.
Why this result matters: For young clients, avoiding a conviction and further licence loss can be critical to education, employment, and long-term opportunities. Careful preparation and strong advocacy can make a significant difference.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court charged with driving with an illicit drug present in oral fluid, blood or urine after police alleged he was stopped for a random breath test and returned a positive indication for cannabis.
Police did not allege any poor manner of driving or dangerous conduct. However, aggravating circumstances included that the client was driving on a learner licence and had two passengers in the vehicle at the time.
Drug driving offences are treated seriously in New South Wales and can result in fines, licence consequences, and criminal findings. For this client, the matter carried particular significance as he was only 17 years old, had not yet finished high school, and was at the beginning of his adult life.
The client had no criminal antecedents, limited traffic history, and one prior infringement for driving unsupervised.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska reviewed the charge papers, carefully conferenced with the client to obtain full instructions, and advised on the subjective material required to present the strongest possible case to the Court.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska made submissions emphasising the client’s youth, limited prior history, future prospects, and the significant long-term consequences a conviction would carry.
After considering the circumstances, the Court dealt with the matter by way of a Conditional Release Order without conviction for 12 months with standard conditions.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, and no disqualification was imposed.
Why this result matters: For young clients, avoiding a criminal conviction can be critical to education, employment, and future opportunities. Early legal advice and careful preparation can make a substantial difference to the final outcome.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Our client appeared before the Court charged with driving with an illicit drug present in oral fluid, blood or urine after police alleged he was stopped for random roadside testing and returned a positive indication for cocaine.
Drug driving offences are treated seriously in New South Wales and can result in fines, licence consequences, and criminal findings. In this matter, the consequences extended well beyond the courtroom. Our client was 19 years old, employed full-time as a security guard working throughout the Newcastle and Hunter region, and relied on holding a valid security licence for his employment.
Under the Security Industry Act 1997 (NSW) and associated regulations, a finding of guilt for a drug driving offence can disqualify a person from holding a security licence for 5 years, while a conviction can result in a 10-year disqualification.
The client also had a poor traffic record and was already serving a demerit points suspension at the time of sentence, making the matter particularly challenging. He had, however, no criminal antecedents.
Lamont Law solicitor Kristina Batkovska carefully reviewed the relevant legislation, advised the client about the serious employment consequences of the charge, and prepared submissions emphasising that he would suffer substantial extra-curial punishment through the likely loss of his security licence.
Appearing on the client’s behalf, Kristina Batkovska sought leniency despite the client’s traffic history and highlighted the significant impact any conviction would have on his future employment and livelihood.
After considering the circumstances, the Court dealt with the matter by way of a Conditional Release Order without conviction for 12 months with standard conditions.
As a result, no conviction was recorded, and no licence disqualification was imposed.
Why this result matters: By avoiding a conviction, the impact on the client’s security licence was substantially reduced. This outcome protected his future employment prospects and demonstrated the importance of careful preparation, knowledge of industry-specific consequences, and strong advocacy.
This case result was dependent on its own facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Articles
Deprivation of liberty refers to circumstances in which an accused’s actions restrict or remove another person’s freedom of movement against their will. In criminal law, this concept frequently arises [...]
25 April 2026
In recent years, the rise of telecommunication technologies, social media, and internet-based messaging platforms has caused an increase in the means by which threats, harassment, or offending communication can [...]
25 April 2026
A sweeping police crackdown is underway in Newcastle following a sharp increase in organised youth-led break-and-enter offences across the region. With multiple arrests and specialised task forces mobilised, our [...]
14 September 2025
