30 Oct 2018
B v T [2018] NZHC 2801
- Citation
- [2018] NZHC 2801
- Court
- High Court
No error of law was demonstrated. The Family Court properly gave limited weight to the 2014 s133 report given changed circumstances and the inability to test the report-writer's evidence; replacement of the lawyer-for-child memorandum was lawful; s5 of the Care of Children Act does not mandate a mathematically exact 50/50 time split and the Family Court's parenting order (fortnightly term-time regime and holiday arrangements) was a justified shared-care arrangement tailored to protect the children's welfare in light of entrenched parental communication breakdown; appeal dismissed.