TLR v Tun

[2024] QDC 147

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

TLR v TUN [2024] QDC 147

PARTIES:

TLR

(appellant)

v

TUN

(respondent)

FILE NO:

D17 of 2023

DIVISION:

Appellate

PROCEEDING:

Appeal under the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012.

ORIGINATING COURT:

Brisbane Magistrates Court

DELIVERED ON:

30 September 2024

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

26 August 2024

JUDGE:

Byrne KC DCJ

ORDER:

1.   Application for leave to adduce additional evidence refused.

2.   Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – DOMESTIC AND FAMILY VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT 2012 – where the appellant and the respondent filed cross-applications for a Protection Order – where a Protection Order was made against the appellant only following a contested hearing – where the appellant submits that the Magistrate failed to give proper weight to the evidence and failed to find that the respondent had committed acts of domestic violence against the appellant - whether the Magistrate erred in making findings of fact.

APPEAL – DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – DOMESTIC AND FAMILY VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT 2012 – where the appellant seeks leave to adduce further evidence, namely a Queensland Police Service record of an attendance – where police attended due to a complaint that the respondent had assaulted her ex-husband and his partner – where the appellant was unaware of the material until after the hearing - where the appellant submits that the evidence is relevant to prove propensity and to the assessment of the respondent’s credibility and reliability - where the record was not put before this Court – whether the record is admissible on the appeal.

LEGISLATION:

Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 (Qld) ss. 164, 37, 22A, 41G.

CASES:

Allesch v Maunz (2000) 203 CLR 172.
Coal v Allied Operations Pty Ltd v AIRC (2000) 203 CLR 194.
DU v Jackson (DCJ) [2024] QCA 122.
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118.
McDonald v Queensland Police Service [2018] 2 Qd R 612.
R v Stephens [2021] QCA 127.
Robinson Helicopter Company Inc v McDermott (2016) 90 ALJR 67.
Sutton v Hunter and Anor [2022] QCA 208.

COUNSEL:

The appellant was self-represented.

Ms. M. Cullen for the respondent.

SOLICITORS:

The appellant was self-represented.

Legal Aid Queensland for the respondent.

Introduction and identification of the issues.

1. On 17 October 2023 a Protection Order was made against the appellant, following a contested hearing of cross-applications. In order to save confusion, I will refer to the parties by their role in this appeal, rather than in the cross-applications heard below.

2. Although legally represented at the hearing, the appellant is now self-represented. The pleaded grounds of appeal differ from those pursued in the written outline of submissions. The respondent has, properly, treated the expanded grounds in the outline as the grounds of appeal to be argued on appeal. I will paraphrase them:

   1)The Magistrate erred in failing to give proper weight, or any weight, to the evidence of the witnesses called by the appellant. In particular, the Magistrate erred in giving weight to those witnesses…