Legal Research
Cases
Lobb v Ryan

Lobb v Ryan

Case [2020] NZHC 2841 30 October 2020

Type to search within this case.

NOTE: PURSUANT TO S 169 OF THE FAMILY PROCEEDINGS ACT 1980, ANY REPORT OF THIS PROCEEDING MUST COMPLY WITH SS 11B, 11C AND 11D OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT 1980. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE SEE

https://

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2019-404-1543 CIV-2019-404-1595

[2020] NZHC 2841

UNDER Family Proceedings Act 1980, Property (Relationships) Act 1976 and Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003

BETWEEN

STUART JAMES LOBB

Appellant

AND

VERENA COLLEEN RYAN

Respondent

Hearing: 24 August 2020

Appearances:

Appellant in person

P Cobcroft for the Respondent

Judgment:

30 October 2020

JUDGMENT OF POWELL J

[Costs and contempt issues]

This judgment was delivered by me on 30 October 2020 at 3.30 pm pursuant to R 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

LOBB v RYAN [2020] NZHC 2841 [30 October 2020]

[1] Following a hearing on 27 February 2020, I issued two judgments dismissing appeals brought by the appellant, Stuart Lobb, against three decisions of Judge Burns in the Family Court.

[2] The first judgment (“the dissolution appeal”)1 dismissed an appeal against a decision of Judge Burns in the Family Court dissolving Mr Lobb’s marriage to the respondent, Verena Ryan. The second judgment (“the occupation, spousal maintenance and credit contracts appeal”)2 dismissed appeals against two further decisions of Judge Burns declining to grant Mr Lobb an occupation order, declining to grant spousal maintenance, and refusing to open a credit contract.

[3] Costs were awarded to Ms Ryan in respect of both judgments,3 with the occupation, spousal maintenance and credit contracts appeal judgment including directions for determining the amount of costs, as well as if there had been any contempt by Mr Lobb in the course of the appeal process in this Court.4

[4] Mr Lobb promptly appealed both judgments to the Court of Appeal. The application for leave to appeal the dissolution appeal judgment has been dismissed.5 With regard to the occupation order, spousal maintenance and credit contracts appeal the Court of Appeal advised that if Mr Lobb wished to appeal on the occupation order and credit contract issues leave would have to be sought in the High Court. Mr Lobb subsequently applied for leave and this was declined on 11 August 2020 (“the leave judgment”).6 Costs were awarded to Ms Ryan on the leave application, the leave judgment noting that following the filing of submissions the costs arising on the leave judgment would be addressed at the same hearing as the costs on the earlier two judgments.7

1      Lobb v Ryan [2020] NZHC 347.
2      Lobb v Ryan [2020] NZHC 834.
3 Dissolution appeal at [12], Occupation, spousal maintenance and credit contract appeal at [68].
4      Occupation, spousal maintenance and credit contract appeal at [68]-[69].
5      Lobb v Ryan [2020] NZCA 244.
6      Lobb v Ryan [2020] NZHC 2031.
7 At [19].

There are accordingly two issues to be determined in this judgment:

(a)the quantum of costs payable in favour…

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 Lobb v Ryan

Details

AGLC: Lobb v Ryan [2020] NZHC 2841
Case: [2020] NZHC 2841
Decision Date: 30 October 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Lobb v Ryan, Stuart Lobb brought an appeal against a series of Family Court decisions dissolving his marriage to Verena Ryan, declining to grant him an occupation order, declining to grant spousal maintenance, and refusing to open a credit contract. Costs were awarded to Ms Ryan in respect of the appeals and the application for leave to appeal. The issues before the Court were the quantum of costs payable to Ms Ryan and the contempt issues. Ms Ryan sought an order holding Mr Lobb in contempt of Court for consistently breaching the suppression order in the face of numerous warnings and his continued use of intemperate and pejorative language directed towards Ms Ryan and Ms Cobcroft. Mr Lobb denied being in contempt of Court at any point. The Court found that Mr Lobb had breached the suppression order and had consistently used intemperate and pejorative language in direct violation of the orders made. Mr Lobb was fined $7,500.00 to be paid into Court within 30 days, with 50 per cent of this sum to be paid out to Ms Ryan when received.

Orders