DENNING AND ROBERTS - [2024] NZHC 3734

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CIV-2023-409-397 CIV-2023-409-398

CIV-2023-409-399 [2024] NZHC 3734

BETWEEN
DENNING

Appellant

AND

ROBERTS

Respondent

Hearing: On the papers

Appearances:

Appellant self represented C E Finn for Respondent

Judgment:

9 December 2024

Reissued:

4 August 2025

JUDGMENT OF EATON J

This judgment was delivered by me on …….. at ……… pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

DENNING v ROBERTS [2024] NZHC 3734 [9 December 2024]

Introduction

[1] Ms Denning has filed three notices of appeal. She appeals decisions of the Family Court. For case management purposes the appeals are being considered together. In relation to each of the appeals Ms Denning has made an application for waiver of security for costs and in relation to one, she seeks leave to appeal out of time.

[2] Ms Denning did not attach any of the decisions under appeal when she filed her notice of appeal, having identified the decisions under appeal by reference only to dates. She has not filed copies of the decisions under appeal. That is in breach of r 20.0(5) of the High Court Rules 2016 and has occasioned delay.

The three appeals

[3]I briefly summarise the three appeals.

CIV-2023-409-397 (397)

[4] By way of notice of appeal dated 7 August 2023, Ms Denning appeals the decision of the Family Court dated 21 July 2023 which she says declined her access to a full and complete copy of the Care of Children Act 2004 (COCA) file. Ms Denning says that the decision appealed also includes related decisions of 18 October 2021, 12 April 2023 and 12 July 2023.

[5] Decisions with those dates concerning the matters alleged do not exist. What Ms Denning is likely to be referring to is:

(a)a minute of Judge Duggan dated 12 April 2021;

(b)a minute of Judge Walsh dated 23 July 2021;

(c)a judgment of Judge Walsh dated 15 October 2021; and

(d)a minute of Judge Hambleton dated 12 July 2023.

[6] Those decisions relate to Ms Denning’s application to have full access to Family Court files and documentation regarding proceedings that she is involved in pertaining to COCA. Judge Walsh declined Ms Denning access to the file, finding that there were special reasons why access should not be granted.1 In her notice of appeal, she says that she is entitled to a full and complete copy of the COCA file as she is a party to the proceedings.

CIV-2023-409-398 (398)

[7] By way of notice of appeal dated 20 July 2023, Ms Denning appeals the decisions of the Family Court of 26 June 2023, which she says struck out without notice and in chambers proceedings consolidated under the Property Relationships Act 1976 and Family Proceedings Act 1980. Ms Denning says that because the COCA proceedings were stayed, the Court was not permitted to strike out the proceedings because she failed to progress them. Judge Hambleton’s minute matching the date in Ms Denning’s…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading DENNING AND ROBERTS

Details

AGLC: DENNING AND ROBERTS [2024] NZHC 3734
Case: [2024] NZHC 3734
Decision Date: 9 December 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Denning and Roberts involves an appeal by Ms Denning against decisions made by the Family Court. The High Court of New Zealand, Christchurch Registry, is reviewing three appeals filed by Ms Denning, concerning issues related to access to court files, the striking out of proceedings, and orders related to guardianship and paternity. The appeals were considered together for case management purposes. Ms Denning sought a waiver of security for costs and leave to appeal out of time in relation to one of the appeals.

The legal issues before the court included whether Ms Denning's appeals had merit and whether the court should grant a waiver of security for costs and leave to appeal out of time. The court examined Ms Denning's submissions on impecuniosity and the merits of the appeals. The court also considered whether the appeals were brought within the prescribed time limits and whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted.

The court found that Ms Denning was impecunious but did not accept her claims regarding the merits of her appeals. The court held that the Family Court's decisions were appropriate and that Ms Denning's appeals lacked merit. The court also rejected Ms Denning's application to appeal out of time, stating that the appeal was clearly hopeless and an abuse of process. The court ordered Ms Denning to pay security for costs in the sum of $795 for each appeal, to be paid by 15 January 2025. If security was not paid by that date, the respondent could apply for an order dismissing the appeals.

Ms Denning's applications to dispense with security for costs on appeal were dismissed, and her application to appeal 399 out of time was also dismissed.

Orders