EC v EC  NZFC 7788
Published 07 August 2018
Application for property order — presumption of competence — whether subject person lacked competence — definition of property — inherent power to make directions to prevent an abuse of process — Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988, ss 24, 36 & 62 — Form PPPR 10.
The applicant sought a property order in respect of his own property on the grounds that he partly lacked the competence to deal with his own property. The court found that there was a presumption of competence, and that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the applicant was deemed to be competent. The applicant's bare assertion was not sufficient to displace the presumption of competence.
The court noted that it appeared that the applicant sought to divest himself of property, but that it was unclear which property he referred to as the applicant had made reference to concepts of legal persona and his name, which the court noted was not property as defined in the Act.
The court was not satisfied that jurisdiction was established and the applications were dismissed. Exercising the inherent powers of the court, a direction was made that no further applications on the matter be accepted for filing without the Judge's express leave.
Judgment Date: 27 September 2017.
* * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *