New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Cohabitation

Legal area

Court

14 Nov 2017

NGAVAEVAE v HARRISON [2017] NZHC 2788

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2788
Court

High Court

On the limited affidavit evidence the applicant has demonstrated a reasonably arguable factual and legal case that she was in a qualifying de facto relationship with the respondent and therefore has an arguable interest in the property under the Property (Relationships) Act; in the interests of justice the Notice of Claim (caveat) is to be sustained pending resolution at trial; leave reserved for the respondent to apply if the applicant does not prosecute the claim expeditiously and costs are awarded to the applicant on a 2B basis plus disbursements.
26 Sept 2014

MARTIN v ESTATE OF MARSH [2014] NZHC 2354

Citation

[2014] NZHC 2354
Court

High Court

The High Court affirmed the Family Court: on the whole evidence and applying s 2D(2) holistically the parties did not live together as a couple in the relevant period; although the appellant stayed with the deceased at times (and some cohabitation occurred 2000–2004), there was no sufficient merger of lives, financial interdependence, or public reputation of a couple to constitute a de facto relationship for 2000–2009; the appellant did not discharge the burden on the balance of probabilities, appeal dismissed.
22 Mar 2012

DM V MP HC WN CIV-2011-485-1421

Citation

openlaw-d1c8669d_143f_4ffb_85da_0d1c0efa692c.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court held that the Family Court did not err in law and was entitled on the evidence to find the parties resumed a de facto relationship from about August 2003 until March 2010; the contemporaneous relationship with Ms X did not negate the de facto relationship given the continuing and robust indicia (cohabitation for substantial periods, merged finances, public presentation, sexual relationship and support of MP's son), and the objective s2D assessment, including conduct evidencing mutual commitment, supported dismissal of the appeal.
10 Jun 2009

WPH V ITP HC AK CIV 2009-404-000462

Citation

openlaw-4c5a6b12_bbeb_4638_9ff9_fed1b5f34192.pdf
Court

High Court

On the cumulative s 2D factors and given the Family Court judge's credibility findings, the parties continued to live together as a couple on and after 1 February 2002; the High Court will not overturn those factual conclusions absent clear error, therefore the appeal is dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

NGAVAEVAE v HARRISON [2017] NZHC 2788

MARTIN v ESTATE OF MARSH [2014] NZHC 2354

DM V MP HC WN CIV-2011-485-1421

WPH V ITP HC AK CIV 2009-404-000462