29 Sept 2011
HENDERSON V WHARTON AND TOKI HC WHA CIV-2011-488-000078
- Citation
- openlaw-8740a29c_264c_4017_b658_8db547d3c023.pdf
- Court
- High Court
Although some acts (sign, notices, correspondence) were specified acts and together constituted a pattern of behaviour and s17 did not excuse the sign, the s16 requirement that making an order be necessary to protect the applicant from further harassment was not satisfied because the dispute arose from an access issue that has been resolved and there was no evidence of ongoing harassment; accordingly the High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the District Court's refusal to grant a restraining order.