MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Ex’s Lawyer – Filed application to withdraw as counsel on record (Update of Revamp family court – Part 4)

Filed under: General — nzleagle @ 3:27 pm Tue 17th March 2015

Ok, so those who have been following my updates…. last post (

Have had a lot of activity on my case in the last 2 months, from a directions conference where ex’s Lawyer and Lawyer for child got dragged though the coals for this continuing to be going thought the court as it should be straight forward, and gave them 2 weeks to convene a round table to discuss contact, and if no agreement is reached, to file updated evidence within 4 weeks.

A few days prior to the Directions Conference I requested contact at the end of February out of the region for a family function. This was briefly discussed prior to the judge arriving in the room at the Directions Conference, and was agreed to.

After the directions conference, it was obvious that the 2 week time frame was never going to work in with all 4 parties involved, I was available 24/7, ex was only available on Mondays, and the Lawyer for child and her Lawyer struggled to find time to suit everyone. It was eventually agreed for a Friday, but 2 days prior ex pulls out as she could not get the time off work, and put back to the following monday. (3 1/2 weeks after directions confrence) I also started to get asked about the contact I had requested, things that were irrelevant, and hare say that she had heard about who was and was not going to be at the function. So with less than 24 hours till the agreed contact taking place, still uncertainty I applied for a warrant to enforce the contact. While the file was before the judge I received confirmation that contact would go ahead. Court came back saying my application was denied, but the court has serious concerns as to why contact is not taking place, and maybe it needs to consider reversal of care. And notice of defence to be filed within 3 days and a further directions conference set down for the 24th of March.

The round table went ahead the following Monday, and rather than focusing on the issues, they just wanted to know what my proposal was, and found every excuse under the sun why it wouldn’t work. About 45 minutes into it they hung up (was via teleconference) to discuss things, and was told they would call back soon. An hour later I receive an e-mail saying that my proposal is very complicated, and my ex is considering it, and will be in touch soon.

The following day was the last day I could file my updated evidence without needing to get an extension, so after not hearing anything about my proposal I went ahead and filed my updated evidence, which essentially made negotiating impossible afterwards.

The next day my ex files for an extension to the following Monday as she only has Monday’s available to her, come Monday there is no sign of her filing anything, on the Wednesday the Judge approved the extension, and stipulated exactly what they wanted to see in the affidavit. The approval then was followed my a memorandum from ex’s lawyer saying that they were unable to file anything, and due to the work situation, my ex would now be looking for a new lawyer.

Today I filed my Directions conference Memorandum, which was followed by my ex’s lawyer with an Application to be removed as Counsel on the Record, with her affidavit saying she has not heard from my ex since the 2nd of March.

Now my question…. Can this be used as a delaying tactic by fronting up to court saying she has no lawyer, and has no idea how to represent herself, then spend another few months trying to get another lawyer…..?


  1. What is worse, women getting away with these delaying tactics or the family court process assisting them by granting extensions?

    Comment by Colin — Tue 17th March 2015 @ 3:51 pm

  2. I was told the hearing was going to occur in the middle of a holiday that I had planned, informed the court of, and then booked. As the lawyer for ex also wouldn’t be able to attend they changed the date to a couple of days after she arrived back and 1 day after I did.
    I was very jetlagged and this affected my case.
    So, when it suits them they can delay the case, when it doesn’t they will bulldoze it through…..

    Comment by A dad — Tue 17th March 2015 @ 5:30 pm

  3. If you have breasts the Court will delay the case to your heart’s content. If you have a penis they will bulldoze you through.

    Comment by Man X Norton — Tue 17th March 2015 @ 6:04 pm

  4. So where are the much trumpeted family court reforms taking us? My own experience is that its worse than before. I realise that is difficult to achieve.

    so mediation is compulsory now. It has been for all of the hearings have had, 23 of them, so I don’t see anything new. Same judges, same legal aid for the mother, her 8th legal aid jockey lawyer.

    My understanding is that as long as there is a care and protection issue, legal aid is all go. Guess what? The temporary protection order is devised. It says, the mother needs protecting, the children need protecting but the special condition applies which is that: the shared care parenting order applies, so I have the children in my care half of the time.

    As there was another matter regarding schooling before the court regarding schooling, it seems to me that the temporary protection order was granted (with the special condition that the children are in my care half of the time) so that legal aid for the schooling matter applies. After all it is the mother’s 3rd go at getting a protection order. The first was declined, as was the second but each one has cost me thousands to defend.

    I conclude that these parasites are holding me and the children to ransom, for money and our relationship is what is at stake. What sort of low life scum does that?

    Anyone having similar experiences?

    Comment by flimflam — Thu 19th March 2015 @ 6:46 am

  5. Have a talk to your lawyer about making a court application for costs. Delay tactics are frowned upon and if the court believes that the other party is deliberately creating costs they can be made to pay for it. While it may not get what you want – it will provide an deterrent for the other party to delay things for longer.

    Comment by prouddad — Tue 24th March 2015 @ 8:03 am

  6. Dear nzleagle, from my reading of your 4 posts it has been over a year that you have been trying to re-establish contact and have a relationship with your child. From my understanding, in all that time little, if any, contact has occurred in spite of an existing parenting order.

    It is not clear exactly what you would like the ideal outcome to be.

    Here is one approach that you could consider:
    A. Stop.
    Just stop trying for the next X months or so. Simply sit back and allow the process to prevent your child from having contact with you. Follow through on any directions they give you without delay but otherwise just be a mostly passive victim of the process.

    Set a date – could be tomorrow – could be say 18 months from that date in Feb 2014 (or whatever) where you have a fixed deadline for yourself for taking step B. Step B will occur on that date absolutely regardless of what is or is not happening in the process or what people promise they will do etc. The start of step B happens on that date anyway.

    Don’t tell anyone that step B is planned.

    B. Regardless of what happens with the current process from now on step B starts on a specific date.
    Step B is for you to file an application for reversal of care.
    The decision for your application is to take one of the following options:
    1. the care of the child is reversed so that the child can have a healthy and stable relationship with both parents.
    2. the court orders that the relationship of the child with the father be terminated completely.

    Option 1: The care of the child is reversed.
    This is because clearly the mother has and is going to continue to obstruct the child from having and maintaining a relationship with the father. Whereas the father is committed that, should the child be in his care, he will ensure the child’s relationship with the mother is maintained.

    Option 2: The relationship of the child with the father be terminated completely.
    This would be because the court accepts that the court and the process is either unwilling or unable to enforce a system where the child’s contact with the father is constantly and protractedly undermined by the mother. And the court feels that it is preferable to terminate the child’s relationship with the father than give the child an opportunity to have a relationship with both parents as in option 1.

    Then sit back and be prepared for either option to occur or for the court to continue with it’s current ineffectual behaviour.

    Comment by Vman — Thu 2nd April 2015 @ 12:43 pm

  7. Good suggestion, thanks Vman.

    Judge Bashier and I think Judge Inglis are the only NZ familycaught$ judge that I have heard of that have reversed care.

    Bashier’s example was under more strenuous circumstances than nzleagle has described.
    Judge Inglis’s example was under similar circumstances to those nzleagle has described.

    Interesting how familycaught$ uses it’s levers against fathers and very rarely against mothers.

    In doing so, it incentivises huge social problems onto the children…….
    They know about billing parents, but nothing about protecting children or good parents.
    It is like watching a train crash in slow motion.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 2nd April 2015 @ 1:53 pm

  8. My own experience with judge boshier’s office.
    I cannot say that he or his staff had direct involment with our case. Soon after his office became aware of certain court behaviour things changed for our children – for the better. I appreciated whatever involvement his office may have had.

    Comment by Brad — Wed 15th April 2015 @ 1:54 am

  9. Dear Brad, thank you for sharing your experiences.

    I believe the value of this website is higher, when the good stories are told as often as the bad stories. Of course it is very hard to know if this occurs? There is more motivation for disaffected people to open their mouths, than for those satisfied with familycaught$ operation.

    Some indication of the balance might be obtained from aggregate statistics, such as scrap’s post several years ago:
    Protection Orders – The Quantitative Figures

    I guess that time is due for that posting to be updated with current statistics. But of course the familycaught$ seems to be surprisingly effective at not generating statistics that would be useful as management information, for improving systems.

    So, we seem to come back to sharing stories, usually penned under false nom de plumes and without any accountability on the story teller…….
    After 3 or 4 generations of familycaught$ operation, it is sad that we have never got past that disastrous impasse.

    Where is my bloody axe?
    Love and kisses,
    MurrayBacon – axe murderer.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 16th April 2015 @ 10:17 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar