Franks v Franks [2012] NSWCA 209

Franks v Franks [2012] NSWCA 209

There was no procedural unfairness as the applicant was represented at the hearing; the property recovery order was validly made as statutory conditions were satisfied; thus, the judicial review application is dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Gregory Franks; First Respondent: Brad Franks; Second Respondent: District Court of NSW; Amicus Curiae: Attorney General of NSW
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Summons dismissed.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Apprehended Violence Orders, Appeal Jurisdiction
Administrative Law Procedure Judicial Review Procedural Fairness Apprehended Violence Orders Appeal Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gregory Franks

Applicant

Brad Franks

First Respondent

District Court of NSW

Second Respondent

Attorney General of NSW

Amicus Curiae

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether procedural fairness was denied in the making of an ancillary property recovery order by the Local Court
  2. 2 Whether a property recovery order falls within an expanded meaning of apprehended violence order for purposes of appeal
  3. 3 Whether there was jurisdictional error in the District Court's decision

Ratio Decidendi

There was no procedural unfairness as the applicant was represented at the hearing; the property recovery order was validly made as statutory conditions were satisfied; thus, the judicial review application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed.

Orders

  • Summons dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.