M V M HC WN CIV-2003-485-2714

M V M HC WN CIV-2003-485-2714

The High Court held that the Family Court was plainly entitled to find that widespread dissemination of untrue allegations of historic rape to third parties with the purpose of shaming the respondent amounted to psychological abuse and harassment within the Domestic Violence Act; NZBORA freedom of expression is a relevant but not determinative consideration and did not require overturning the finding, but because the appellant had complied and undertaken not to continue dissemination the protection order was no longer necessary and was discharged

Citation
openlaw-1ce42271_afa5_4296_8dac_b18c6c9709d3.pdf
Parties
Appellant: M; Respondent: M
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
6 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Making of a Protection Order Under the Domestic Violence Act 1995 / High Court Judgment on Appeal (reserved Judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; protection order discharged as no longer necessary; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Protection Orders, Psychological Abuse, Harassment, Freedom of Expression (nzbora), Statutory Interpretation
Domestic Violence Family Law Constitutional Law Protection Orders Psychological Abuse Harassment Freedom of Expression (nzbora) Statutory Interpretation

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Appellant

M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Making of a Protection Order Under the Domestic Violence Act 1995 / High Court Judgment on Appeal (reserved Judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's dissemination of alleged historical rape allegations amounted to psychological abuse or harassment under the Domestic Violence Act 1995
  2. 2 Whether the special conditions prohibiting dissemination unjustifiably limited the appellant's right to freedom of expression under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act
  3. 3 Whether the protection order and its special conditions remained necessary and appropriately tailored

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the Family Court was plainly entitled to find that widespread dissemination of untrue allegations of historic rape to third parties with the purpose of shaming the respondent amounted to psychological abuse and harassment within the Domestic Violence Act; NZBORA freedom of expression is a relevant but not determinative consideration and did not require overturning the finding, but because the appellant had complied and undertaken not to continue dissemination the protection order was no longer necessary and was discharged

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; protection order discharged as no longer necessary; no order as to costs

Orders

  • Protection order discharged as no longer necessary
  • No order as to costs