7 Jun 2019
On the balance of probabilities the High Court affirmed the Family Court's conclusion that the children acquired habitual residence in New Zealand by virtue of the parents' settled purpose to relocate in March 2017, evidenced by a 12-month lease, property inquiries, retention of the rental during a fortnight in Fiji, and conduct inconsistent with an intention to return to Fiji; accordingly the appeal was dismissed.
22 Jun 2012
The respondent wilfully disobeyed a clear and served High Court order placing the children under New Zealand guardianship; therefore the Court was entitled to issue an arrest order (form E9) authorising arrest, production before the High Court in Wellington at 10am within 72 hours after arrest in New Zealand, and potential committal under r 17.85 if non-compliance continues, while reserving immediate committal until the respondent is produced before the Court.
29 Jun 2011
The High Court found the Family Court correctly concluded there was an agreement that the children would be away for no more than three weeks and therefore their continued presence in New Zealand constituted wrongful retention in breach of the father's custody rights under the Hague Convention and the Care of Children Act; the respondent failed to prove any s106 defence (no acquiescence; no reliable evidence that the child objected); procedural complaints were not pursued and did not vitiate the process; accordingly the mandatory return order under s105(2) was confirmed and the appeal dismiss…