NSW Caselaw
District Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Tosson MAHMOUD v Vincent SUTHERLAND [2013] NSWDC 140 Decision date: 07 June 2013 Before: Cogswell SC DCJ Decision: Appeal upheld. Costs order set aside. Catchwords: Court of Appeal remitted matter of costs in apprehended violence order to District Court for re-determination according to law - Court of Appeal held applicable law (s 99(3) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007) overlooked - original application for apprehended personal violence order - order sought by one occupant of a premises against another - Court of Appeal assumption contrary to terms of s 99(3) - District Court nevertheless bound by decision of Court of Appeal - application found not to be frivolous or vexatious - costs order of magistrate set aside. Both parties unrepresented litigants - judge sought Crown Solicitor's assistance as amicus curiae - Crown Solicitor's Office declined to appear but briefed counsel as amicus. Procedure - judges - disqualification for bias - application dismissed - proceedings not interfered with by strangers to litigation - relevant documents marked for identification and communications fully disclosed. Costs - application to have costs paid by strangers to litigation rejected - compensation for loss of time of litigants in person cannot constitute costs. Application for special leave to appeal to the High Court from Court of Appeal decision in the same case no impediment in this case to District Court judge proceeding to determine case. Legislation Cited: Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001, s 20. Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007, ss 99(1), 99(2), 99(3). Cases Cited: Cachia v Hanes (1994) 179 CLR 403. DAR v Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) [2008] QCA 309. Mahmoud v Sutherland [2012] NSWCA 306. Proctor v Jetway Aviation Pty Ltd [1984] 1 NSWLR 166. Walker Corporation Pty Ltd v Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority [2009] NSWCA 178; (2009) 168 LGERA 1. Category: Principal judgment Parties: Tosson Mahmoud (Appellant) Vincent Sutherland (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: A. Mitchelmore (Amicus Curiae) In person (Appellant) In person (Respondent) File Number(s): DC 2009/327342
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate