P E v M U [2010] NSWDC 2

P E v M U [2010] NSWDC 2

The appeal was upheld because there was no proper evidential basis for making the APVOs, the orders should have been annulled due to the lack of a hearing on the merits, and the disputes did not rise to the level required under the legislation for intervention.

Parties
Applicant: P E; Respondent: M U; Respondent: R U; Respondent: B U
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld
Legal Topics
Apprehended Personal Violence Orders, Neighbour Disputes, Appeal Against Refusal of Annulment
Civil Procedure Apprehended Personal Violence Orders Neighbour Disputes Appeal Against Refusal of Annulment

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P E

Applicant

M U

Respondent

R U

Respondent

B U

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Apprehended Personal Violence Orders (APVOs) were properly made
  2. 2 Whether sufficient evidence supported the making of APVOs
  3. 3 Whether refusal to annul APVOs was correct

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was upheld because there was no proper evidential basis for making the APVOs, the orders should have been annulled due to the lack of a hearing on the merits, and the disputes did not rise to the level required under the legislation for intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld

Orders

  • APVOs set aside
  • Application for cross APVOs dismissed