New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Discharge of protection order

Legal area

Court

25 Jul 2023

HAGLEY v HAGLEY [2023] NZHC 1950

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1950
Court

High Court

Appeal allowed: the High Court found the Family Court judge gave undue primacy to the children's views and conflated family violence proceedings with care proceedings (COCA), failed to properly assess key s 110(2) factors (notably whether areas of concern were no longer evident given respondent's relapse to drinking and limited demonstrated insight), and therefore erred in discharging the protection order; the High Court reinstated the protection order and held the appointment of lawyer for child in these circumstances was ultra vires because s 166(1)(c)(ii) is to be read as confined to proce…
30 May 2023

[SOUTHALL] v [NORTHEY] [2023] NZHC 1313

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1313
Court

High Court

The High Court found on the balance of probabilities that the appellant committed the 2022 breaches (driving past the respondent's workplace after becoming aware and parking outside her home), that those breaches together with prior convictions and the proximity of ongoing Care of Children proceedings elevated the risk of future family violence, and that the appellant failed to satisfy the s110 test; accordingly the protection order remains necessary and the appeal is dismissed.
27 May 2021

THOMAS v KANE [2021] NZHC 1211

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1211
Court

High Court

Judge Twaddles determinations were correct: the protection order was not discharged because credible findings of past possessive, controlling and psychologically abusive behaviour, the appellants lack of insight and ongoing risk established that the order remained necessary for the respondents protection; the parenting order leaving the child in the respondents day-to-day care was justified by the childs settled schooling, expressed views, need for continuity, expert and evidentiary findings on parental competence and risk, and moving the child would harm his welfare; costs awarded were…
30 Apr 2021

RH v AH [2021] NZHC 957

Citation

[2021] NZFLR 368
Court

High Court

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.
2 Nov 2020

DUNN v ELLIOTT [2020] NZHC 2872

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2872
Court

High Court

The High Court affirmed the Family Court: the protection order remains necessary because the evidence established a pattern of coercive psychological abuse, credible post‑order unwanted contact and harassment, corroborated and consistent reports from the protected children and respondent, and the appellant failed to discharge the evidential burden of raising countervailing factors given his lack of insight and refusal of interventions; the subjective fears of the protected persons were objectively reasonable and supported continuation of the order.
6 Jul 2016

M v N [2016] NZHC 1524

Citation

[2016] NZHC 1524
Court

High Court

The High Court upheld the Family Court's home schooling order and dismissed the appeal on that point because the judge properly applied ss 5 and 6 of the Care of Children Act; it varied the contact orders to allow phased increased unsupervised contact at public venues immediately and limited home unsupervised contact from a future date with a mandatory review in early 2017, balancing low assessed sexual risk against emotional safety risks arising from the mother's opposition; it refused to discharge the protection order because it remained necessary to regulate the parties' dysfunctional rela…

New Zealand Case Law

HAGLEY v HAGLEY [2023] NZHC 1950

[SOUTHALL] v [NORTHEY] [2023] NZHC 1313

THOMAS v KANE [2021] NZHC 1211

RH v AH [2021] NZHC 957

DUNN v ELLIOTT [2020] NZHC 2872

M v N [2016] NZHC 1524