28 Feb 2013
The Registrar correctly refused to accept the stay application for filing because Court practice requires stay applications to be made first to the lower court where there is concurrent jurisdiction, no special circumstances justified departing from that practice, and the applicant had alternative routes (High Court or Tribunal) to seek a stay.
16 Aug 2012
Section 3A(2) of the Family Protection Act should be read to exclude Family Court jurisdiction only where there are extant High Court proceedings seeking distributions inconsistent with a will (eg FPA, Law Reform (Testamentary Promises) Act, Property (Relationships) Act claims); no such extant High Court claims existed when the FPA application was filed because the disputed probate proceedings had been settled and the s 52 Administration Act initiative was not properly pursued, therefore the Family Court properly exercised jurisdiction and the applicant's primary claim of jurisdictional illeg…
11 Dec 2009
Under s 3A(4) the High Court must order removal into the High Court unless satisfied that the proceedings would be more appropriately dealt with in the Family Court; the Judge was not so satisfied and ordered removal to the High Court, Auckland Registry.