BLACK v BANKS [2016] NZHC 2492

BLACK v BANKS [2016] NZHC 2492

The High Court dismissed the appeal because the Family Court Judge lawfully considered the mandatory statutory factors (pattern and effect), was entitled to prefer his factual findings based on seeing and hearing the witnesses, and reasonably concluded that a final protection order was not necessary in the circumstances (changed workplace arrangements and active parenting proceedings reduced the necessity for protection).

Citation
[2016] NZHC 2492
Parties
Appellant: Black; Respondent: Banks
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
19 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Protection Order Appeal (domestic Violence Act 1995) / High Court Appeal by Way of Rehearing; Leave to Appeal Out of Time Granted
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal out of time granted; respondent's costs application declined
Legal Topics
Protection Orders, Psychological Abuse, Pattern of Behaviour, Section 14 Domestic Violence Act, Parenting Proceedings, Costs and Legal Aid
Family Law Domestic Violence Care of Children Civil Procedure Protection Orders Psychological Abuse Pattern of Behaviour Section 14 Domestic Violence Act +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Black

Appellant

Banks

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Protection Order Appeal (domestic Violence Act 1995) / High Court Appeal by Way of Rehearing; Leave to Appeal Out of Time Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Family Court Judge failed to consider mandatory s14(3) pattern of behaviour requirement
  2. 2 Whether the Judge failed to take into account the effect of past domestic violence under s14(5)
  3. 3 Whether the Judge placed undue weight on changed workplace arrangements

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the appeal because the Family Court Judge lawfully considered the mandatory statutory factors (pattern and effect), was entitled to prefer his factual findings based on seeing and hearing the witnesses, and reasonably concluded that a final protection order was not necessary in the circumstances (changed workplace arrangements and active parenting proceedings reduced the necessity for protection).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal out of time granted; respondent's costs application declined

Orders

  • Leave to appeal out of time granted.
  • Appeal dismissed and Family Court decision upheld; no final protection order made.