Mark William Walburn v Alexander Frederick Walburn

The appellant, Mark William Walburn, sought to appeal a decision to make an Apprehended Violence Order against him, which was made under the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007. The protected persons were the appellant's mother and brother, Alexander Frederick Walburn. The appellant's challenge to the making of the order centred on two specific incidents involving verbal arguments between the brothers, one of which resulted in police attendance. The appellant argued that the protected persons did not have reasonable grounds to fear his conduct and did not in fact fear it, and that his conduct did not warrant the making of an Apprehended Violence Order.

The court considered the statutory provisions relevant to the making of an Apprehended Violence Order and the appropriate standard of proof. The court noted that the onus was on the protected persons to demonstrate that they had reasonable grounds to fear the appellant's conduct, and that the court must be satisfied that the protected persons in fact feared the conduct. The court also considered the nature and severity of the incidents, the relationship between the parties, and the likelihood of future occurrences. The court concluded that the protected persons had established the requisite fear and that the incidents warranted the making of the order.

The appeal was dismissed, and the Apprehended Violence Order was upheld. The court found that the protected persons had established that they had reasonable grounds to fear the appellant's conduct and that they in fact feared it. The court also found that the incidents, taken as a whole, warranted the making of the order. The appellant's arguments that the protected persons did not fear his conduct and that the incidents did not warrant the making of the order were rejected. The court found that the incidents, while not severe in isolation, were indicative of a pattern of behaviour that gave rise to a reasonable fear of future occurrences.