Meadus v. Meadus

Meadus v. Meadus

Leave to appeal was denied because the application did not raise a question of law or jurisdiction nor disclose a reasonably arguable case or issue of general importance; the Provincial Court judge correctly dismissed the ex parte EPO application because the applicant failed to establish the required seriousness or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2020 NLCA 35
Parties
Applicant/intended Appellant: Cory Meadus; Respondent/intended Respondent: Suzanne Meadus (Peddle)
Court
Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Emergency Protection Order Under the Family Violence Protection Act / Application for Leave to Appeal to Court of Appeal Following Dismissal in Provincial Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal denied; costs awarded to respondent.
Legal Topics
Emergency Protection Order, Leave to Appeal, Jurisdictional Limits, Urgency Requirement, Custody/parenting Orders
Source Language
english
Family Law Domestic/family Violence Procedural Law Emergency Protection Order Leave to Appeal Jurisdictional Limits Urgency Requirement Custody/parenting Orders

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cory Meadus

Applicant/intended Appellant

Suzanne Meadus (Peddle)

Respondent/intended Respondent

Procedural Posture

Emergency Protection Order Under the Family Violence Protection Act / Application for Leave to Appeal to Court of Appeal Following Dismissal in Provincial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal under s.12.1(1) of the Family Violence Protection Act is limited to questions of law or jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the Provincial Court judge erred in law in summarily dismissing an ex parte Emergency Protection Order application without reasons
  3. 3 Whether the applicant established on a balance of probabilities the seriousness or urgency required by s.5 to grant an ex parte EPO

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was denied because the application did not raise a question of law or jurisdiction nor disclose a reasonably arguable case or issue of general importance; the Provincial Court judge correctly dismissed the ex parte EPO application because the applicant failed to establish the required seriousness or urgency under s.5 (the most recent alleged incident was nine years earlier), and there was no error in law or in the application of the law.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal denied; costs awarded to respondent.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is denied.
  • Applicant Cory Meadus shall pay respondent Suzanne Meadus (Peddle)'s costs on a party and party basis based on Column 3 of the scale of costs.