D.M.C. v. L.P.C.

D.M.C. v. L.P.C.

The Court found no emergency existed because the matters were capable of being promptly heard inter partes, the applicant gave misleading and incomplete information to the Justice of the Peace including about the availability of an imminent contested hearing, and the alleged threats were not supported by evidence; accordingly the Emergency Protection Order was terminated and costs awarded to the respondent for the misleading ex parte application.

Citation
2005 NSSC 77
Parties
Applicant: D. M. C.; Respondent: L. P. C.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Family Law Domestic Violence / Emergency Protection Order Under Domestic Violence Intervention Act / Hearing to Confirm, Terminate or Vary Ex Parte Emergency Protection Order (inter Partes Hearing Following Ex Parte Order); Parallel Pending Application for Exclusive Possession of Matrimonial Home
Outcome
Emergency Protection Order terminated; costs awarded to respondent
Legal Topics
Emergency Protection Order, Exclusive Possession of Matrimonial Home, Ex Parte Applications, Duty of Disclosure, Costs
Source Language
English
Family Law Domestic Violence Law Procedural Law Emergency Protection Order Exclusive Possession of Matrimonial Home Ex Parte Applications Duty of Disclosure Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D. M. C.

Applicant

L. P. C.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Domestic Violence / Emergency Protection Order Under Domestic Violence Intervention Act / Hearing to Confirm, Terminate or Vary Ex Parte Emergency Protection Order (inter Partes Hearing Following Ex Parte Order); Parallel Pending Application for Exclusive Possession of Matrimonial Home

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the facts established an emergency justifying confirmation of an ex parte Emergency Protection Order under the Domestic Violence Intervention Act
  2. 2 Whether the applicant misled the Justice of the Peace in her ex parte application
  3. 3 Whether the Emergency Protection Order should be terminated or varied

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found no emergency existed because the matters were capable of being promptly heard inter partes, the applicant gave misleading and incomplete information to the Justice of the Peace including about the availability of an imminent contested hearing, and the alleged threats were not supported by evidence; accordingly the Emergency Protection Order was terminated and costs awarded to the respondent for the misleading ex parte application.

Court Disposition

Emergency Protection Order terminated; costs awarded to respondent

Orders

  • Terminate the Emergency Protection Order forthwith
  • Applicant to pay respondent costs in the amount of $1,000