Application for orders — variation of parenting order — protection order — "family violence" — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 4, 5, 5A, 6, 16 & 46G — Family Violence Act 2018, ss 9, 82, 83, 109 & 110 — Domestic Violence Act 1995 — Surrey v Surrey [2010] 2 NZLR 581; [2010] NZFLR 1 — SN v MN [2017] 3 NZLR 448; [2017] NZCA 289 — Kacem v Bashir [2010] NZFLR 884. The parties were parents to a young son. The applicant father applied for the discharge of a parenting order that was in place and in favour of the respondent and the child. The Court found that the protection order had been granted largely because of one significant act of physical abuse that had occurred in 2014. The applicant had abided by the terms of the order since then, but the parties still had problems trusting one another and communicating effectively. Therefore there was still a risk of family violence in the future. The Court ruled that the protection order was to continue. The applicant also sought variation of an existing parenting order, to allow him more contact with the child. Evidence suggested that the child enjoyed spending time with the applicant, and that the applicant was making efforts to deal with his addiction problems and to improve his communication skills. The Court found that the applicant should be granted unsupervised contact with the child, and set out the details and conditions for how such contact was to occur. Judgment Date: 11 February 2022 * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *