In DU v Jackson (DCJ) [2024] QCA 122, the appellant DU filed for judicial review of a District Court decision concerning a protection order made against him. The original decision dismissed DU's appeal against a protection order issued in favour of his ex-girlfriend TG and remitted DU's cross-application for a protection order against TG back to the Magistrates Court. DU's application for judicial review contended jurisdictional errors and bad faith in the District Court's handling of his appeal. However, the primary judge in the Supreme Court refused leave to issue the judicial review application, a decision which DU appealed. The Court of Appeal found that the District Court had not conducted a proper rehearing of the evidence, thus misapprehending its function, which constituted a jurisdictional error. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the previous decisions were set aside, and the Registrar was directed to issue DU's application for judicial review on the ground that the first respondent misapprehended his function, with no further orders as to costs of the appeal.
top of page
bottom of page