DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
JKL v DBA [2020] QDC 159
PARTIES:
JKL
(Appellant)v
DBA
(Respondent)FILE NO/S:
21/19
DIVISION:
Civil
PROCEEDING:
Appeal
ORIGINATING COURT:
Magistrates Court at Gympie
DELIVERED ON:
16 July 2020
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
22 June 2020
JUDGE:
Byrne QC DCJ
ORDER:
Appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:
MAGISTRATES – APPEAL AND REVIEW – QUEENSLAND – where the appellant appeals against the making of a Protection Order made under section 37 of the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 (Qld) – where the Order is enforced for five years – where the Order contains a total of six conditions directed at the appellant’s dealings with the respondent and their five children – whether there was a lack of procedural fairness – whether a relevant relationship was established on the evidence – whether the learned Magistrate failed to give sufficient weight to a police report filed in the proceedings – whether the learned Magistrate failed to properly consider that the terms of the Order were impractical – whether the learned Magistrate failed to consider the impact of orders made in the Family Court - whether the learned Magistrate failed to consider the ability of the appellant to commit domestic violence
Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012, s 4, s 9, s 11, s13, s 14, s 15, s 18, s 23(2), s 37, s 42, s 53, s 56, s 57, s 145, s 164(a), s 168, s 169
ADH v AHL [2017] QDC 103
AK v Western Australia (2008) 232 CLR 438
Allesch v Maunz (2000) 203 CLR 172
Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd v AIRC (2000) 203 CLR 194
Dietrich v The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292
DL v The Queen (2018) 356 ALR 197; [2018] HCA 26
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118
GKE v EUT [2014] QDC 248
House v King (1936) 55 CLR 499
McDonald v Queensland Police Service [2018] 2 Qd R 612
MDE v MLG & Queensland Police Service [2015] QDC 151
Nudd v The Queen (2006) 225 ALR 161
R v War Pensions Entitlement Tribunal; Ex parte Bott (1933) 50 CLR 228
Robinson Helicopter Company Inc v McDermott (2016) 90 ALJR 679
Sudath v Health Care Complaints Commission [2012] NSWCA 171COUNSEL:
Appellant in person.
Ms. M Cullen for the Respondent.SOLICITORS:
Appellant in person.
KLM Solicitors for the Respondent.
The appellant appeals against the making of a Protection Order under section 37 of the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 (DFVP Act) in the Gympie Magistrates Court on 20 November 2019.
The order was made for a period of five years and contained a total of six conditions, directed towards the appellant’s dealings with the respondent and each of their five children, as named persons. It was in the following terms:
(1)That the respondent be of good behaviour towards the aggrieved and not commit domestic violence against the aggrieved.
(2)That the respondent be of good behaviour towards the named person and not commit…
Continue reading JKL v DBA
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- JKL v Dba [2020] QDC 159
- Case
- [2020] QDC 159
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues revolved around whether the Magistrate erred in several respects: whether there was a lack of procedural fairness in the proceedings; whether the evidence sufficiently established the relevant relationship required for the Order; whether the Magistrate failed to give appropriate weight to a police report; whether the terms of the Order were impractical; whether the Magistrate did not properly consider the impact of prior Family Court orders; and whether the Magistrate overlooked the appellant's ability to commit domestic violence.
The court examined these issues and found that the Magistrate's decision was sound. The court held that the procedural fairness was maintained, the relevant relationship was adequately established, and the Magistrate correctly assessed the weight of the police report. Furthermore, the court determined that the Order's terms were practical, the impact of the Family Court orders was appropriately considered, and the appellant's potential to commit domestic violence was adequately evaluated. As a result, the appeal was dismissed.
No additional orders were made beyond the dismissal of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.