PK v MN [2022] NZHC 3488

PK v MN [2022] NZHC 3488

The appeal is dismissed because the Judge did not err: credibility findings that respondent was credible and applicant's account inconsistent were open on the evidence; COVID-19 protocols justified limiting attendees and a female interpreter met trauma-informed minima; applicant failed to prove a reasonable risk of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] NZHC 3488
Parties
Appellant: PK; Respondent: MN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
16 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Family Violence Act — Protection Order / Appeal to High Court (rehearing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection Order Necessity, Credibility Assessment, Support Persons at Hearing/covid Protocols, Trauma Informed Evidence Handling, Immigration Status and Vulnerability, Standard of Review on Appeal
Family Law Family Violence Criminal Procedure Civil Appeal Protection Order Necessity Credibility Assessment Support Persons at Hearing/covid Protocols Trauma Informed Evidence Handling +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PK

Appellant

MN

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Violence Act — Protection Order / Appeal to High Court (rehearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Family Court judge erred by excluding a non-whānau support person at hearing
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to take into account applicant's status as a sexual abuse survivor and transgender vulnerability in credibility findings
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to take into account applicant's immigration status as increasing risk and vulnerability

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the Judge did not err: credibility findings that respondent was credible and applicant's account inconsistent were open on the evidence; COVID-19 protocols justified limiting attendees and a female interpreter met trauma-informed minima; applicant failed to prove a reasonable risk of future violence or necessity for a protection order given separation, passage of time, lack of corroboration, respondent's clear intent to avoid contact and no reliable evidence that immigration status increased risk.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Leave reserved on costs; if any issue as to costs parties to file brief memoranda (no more than three pages) by 20 January 2023