W v THE FAMILY COURT AT NORTH SHORE [2014] NZHC 2483

W v THE FAMILY COURT AT NORTH SHORE [2014] NZHC 2483

The interim restraining order under s 88 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 is temporary and lapses upon determination of the s 67 declaration; therefore Judge Druce correctly concluded he lacked jurisdiction to discharge an order that had already lapsed and there was no breach of natural justice or legitimate expectation warranting relief.

Citation
[2014] NZHC 2483
Parties
Plaintiff: W; First Defendant: The Family Court at North Shore; Second Defendant: The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
9 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Family Court Decision / High Court Judgment on Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed; no relief granted to applicant
Legal Topics
Interim Restraining Orders, Children, Young Persons, And Their Families Act 1989, Natural Justice, Legitimate Expectation, Jurisdiction
Family Law Administrative Law Child Protection Judicial Review Interim Restraining Orders Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 Natural Justice Legitimate Expectation +1 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 7 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W

Plaintiff

The Family Court at North Shore

First Defendant

The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Family Court Decision / High Court Judgment on Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Judge Druce's conclusion was amenable to judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the interim restraining order remained in force after the s 67 declaration
  3. 3 Whether there was a breach of natural justice or legitimate expectation

Ratio Decidendi

The interim restraining order under s 88 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 is temporary and lapses upon determination of the s 67 declaration; therefore Judge Druce correctly concluded he lacked jurisdiction to discharge an order that had already lapsed and there was no breach of natural justice or legitimate expectation warranting relief.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed; no relief granted to applicant

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Costs to defendants on a 2B basis to be fixed by the Registrar