A Sydney court has heard details of an alleged domestic violence order breach involving hundreds of messages sent to a young woman by her former partner.

The case concerns Benjamin Morris and a 19-year-old woman who had been in a relationship with him for around two years. According to evidence reported in court, the woman experienced escalating behaviour that eventually led her to seek safety away from Morris.

The court heard that the woman was forced to run barefoot in the dark and hide in bushes while attempting to escape him. The proceedings have focused on allegations surrounding Morris's behaviour and the restrictions imposed by an apprehended domestic violence order, commonly known as an ADVO.

One of the significant details raised during the proceedings was the number of messages allegedly sent by Morris. He reportedly sent 249 messages within a 24-hour period.

Despite the large number of individual messages, the court treated the communications as one alleged breach of the relevant order. The case highlights how repeated communications can be considered within the framework of an ADVO and how courts assess alleged breaches of protective orders.

ADVOs are designed to protect people from intimidation, harassment, violence or other prohibited behaviour. Conditions can restrict a person's ability to contact or approach another individual, depending on the circumstances and the specific order made by the court.

The evidence presented in this case describes a relationship that had become increasingly difficult for the young woman. The reported incident involving her fleeing and hiding is among the circumstances being considered as part of the proceedings.

The case also demonstrates the challenges faced by people attempting to separate from relationships involving alleged controlling or threatening behaviour. Police and courts can use protective orders to establish legally enforceable boundaries between people where there are concerns about safety.

The reported 249 messages form part of the evidence discussed in court rather than representing 249 separate findings of guilt. The legal significance of the communications depends on the precise terms of the order and the circumstances in which the messages were sent.

The proceedings remain subject to the court process. Allegations presented in court must be tested against the available evidence, and a person accused of an offence is presumed innocent unless and until guilt is established.