Application for orders — exclusion of evidence — admissibility — hearsay — "business records" — Domestic Violence Act 1995 — Evidence Act 2006, ss 7, 8, 16, 17, 18 & 19 — Family Court Act 1980, s 12A — Family Court Rules 2002, rr 3, 158, 170 & 193 — R v Gwaze [2010] NZSC 52 — Wi v R [2009] NZSC 121 — D v O [2006] NZFLR 137 — Donovan v Graham (1991) 4 PRNZ 311 — Brock v Norton [2016] NZFC 468. The applicant sought a protection order against the respondent, his ex-wife. The respondent denied being violent and submitted that in fact the applicant had harassed her and made false allegations. The respondent filed an affidavit to this effect. In the current application the respondent sought to exclude as evidence certain paragraphs of the affidavit and accompanying exhibits, submitting that they were prejudicial and irrelevant. The Court examined the relevant paragraphs and exhibits. The affidavit paragraphs refuted the applicant's allegations, while the exhibits were mostly documents created by third parties that supported the applicant's denials. The Court found that all of the paragraphs and the exhibits were admissible as evidence. They were relevant to the question of whether the applicant genuinely considered the respondent to be a risk to his safety, such that he needed a protection order. Although the exhibits were hearsay evidence, the Court considered them to be admissible via the Court's statutory discretion. Judgment Date: 26 May 2020. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *