Cunningham v Cunningham [2012] NSWSC 849

Cunningham v Cunningham [2012] NSWSC 849

The Magistrate applied the correct statutory test under s 99(3) by determining whether the ADVO application was frivolous or vexatious. There was no error of law or fact requiring intervention; the threshold for costs was not reached given the evidence and findings. Thus, the appeal and application for prerogative relief were dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
['apprehended Violence Orders' 'costs Orders' 'judicial Review' 'appeal Rights']
['administrative Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['apprehended Violence Orders' 'costs Orders' 'judicial Review' 'appeal Rights']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Local Court Magistrate erred in not awarding costs to the plaintiff under s 99(3) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007' 'Whether the application for the ADVO was frivolous or vexatious' "Whether jurisdictional or legal error or a basis for prerogative relief existed in the Magistrate's refusal to award costs"]

Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate applied the correct statutory test under s 99(3) by determining whether the ADVO application was frivolous or vexatious. There was no error of law or fact requiring intervention; the threshold for costs was not reached given the evidence and findings. Thus, the appeal and application for prerogative relief were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • ['Summons dismissed.' 'Defendant to have liberty to apply until 4pm, 3 August 2012, for an order as to costs.']