ARG v BKL [2019] NZHC 1514

ARG v BKL [2019] NZHC 1514

No material error in the Family Court's orders: the extra-curricular clause is a valid exercise of the court's power to impose conditions to give effect to parallel parenting and guardians' joint duties by requiring agreement before one parent commits the children to activities that impose obligations on the other; it does not grant a general veto over activities in the caring parent's time. The holiday allocation by odd/even years with specified timing did not undermine the children's welfare and best interests and did not warrant appellate intervention. Appeal dismissed.

Citation
[2019] NZHC 1514
Parties
Appellant: ARG; Respondent: BKL; Children: Children
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
1 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Care of Children Act 2004 / High Court Appeal From Family Court Final Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Parallel Parenting, Parenting Orders, Extra Curricular Activities, Holiday Arrangements, Best Interests of the Child, Guardians' Joint Duties
Family Law Child Welfare Guardianship Appeals Parallel Parenting Parenting Orders Extra Curricular Activities Holiday Arrangements +2 more

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ARG

Appellant

BKL

Respondent

Children

Children

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Care of Children Act 2004 / High Court Appeal From Family Court Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parenting order requiring agreement before entering children in extra-curricular activities was erroneous or unlawfully gave a veto to the non-caring parent
  2. 2 Whether allocation of extended holidays by odd/even years (with timing in April vs July) was contrary to the children's welfare and best interests
  3. 3 Proper scope of guardians' joint duties under s16(5) and interaction with parallel parenting

Ratio Decidendi

No material error in the Family Court's orders: the extra-curricular clause is a valid exercise of the court's power to impose conditions to give effect to parallel parenting and guardians' joint duties by requiring agreement before one parent commits the children to activities that impose obligations on the other; it does not grant a general veto over activities in the caring parent's time. The holiday allocation by odd/even years with specified timing did not undermine the children's welfare and best interests and did not warrant appellate intervention. Appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Preliminary view: respondent BKL entitled to 2B costs and disbursements and disbursements