31 Jul 2009
CARPENTER V ARMSTRONG HC TAU CIV 2009-470-511
- Citation
- openlaw-430aeada_6b48_4658_b411_8f83862af835.pdf
- Court
- High Court
High Court held Family Court did not give one child (Craig) a reasonable opportunity to express views under s6 but that subsequent inquiries cured any material prejudice; Payne v Payne principles were not applied as binding law in NZ; the Family Court's order permitting immediate relocation was premature given insufficient focused evidence on developmental milestones, capacity to adapt and enforceability of overseas contact; appeal allowed, Family Court orders set aside and interim guardianship and focused further inquiries ordered.