RH v AH [2021] NZHC 957

RH v AH [2021] NZHC 957

Strike-out under r193 was justified because, accepting RH's pleaded facts except where contradicted by the earlier final judgment, there was no reasonable basis for discharge under s110 given prior credibility findings and ongoing risk; the application was an abuse of process as it impermissibly sought to relitigate matters already finally decided, and s87 meant the specified protected person status remained regardless of age or residence, so the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[2021] NZFLR 368
Parties
Appellant: RH; Respondent: AH
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
30 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Family Violence Act 2018 (discharge of Protection Order) / High Court Appeal From Family Court Strike Out of Discharge Application
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection Order, Occupation Order, Strike Out Under Court Rules, Discharge of Protection Order, Res Judicata, Family Violence Act 2018 S110, Family Court Rules R193
Family Law Domestic Violence Civil Procedure Protection Order Occupation Order Strike Out Under Court Rules Discharge of Protection Order Res Judicata +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RH

Appellant

AH

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Family Violence Act 2018 (discharge of Protection Order) / High Court Appeal From Family Court Strike Out of Discharge Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Family Court Rules r193 strike-out was appropriate
  2. 2 Whether the protection order should be discharged under s110 of the Family Violence Act 2018
  3. 3 Application and effect of ss86 and 87 regarding specified persons and adult children

Ratio Decidendi

Strike-out under r193 was justified because, accepting RH's pleaded facts except where contradicted by the earlier final judgment, there was no reasonable basis for discharge under s110 given prior credibility findings and ongoing risk; the application was an abuse of process as it impermissibly sought to relitigate matters already finally decided, and s87 meant the specified protected person status remained regardless of age or residence, so the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Respondent to file submissions on costs within seven days