000			02264nab a22003497a 4500
999			_c8215 _d8215
005			20250625151640.0
008			230601s2022 -nz||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_aToy-Cronin, Bridgette A. _96132
245			_aResponding to abusive litigation : _cBridgette Toy-Cronin _bShort v Short
260			_bLexisNexis, _c2022
500			_aNew Zealand Women's Law Journal - Te Aho Kawe Kaupapa Ture a ngā Wāhine, 2022, 7: 64-76
520			_aShort v Short raises important issues about how the court should conceptualise and prevent psychological abuse where the method of abuse is the court’s own proceedings. If it is a form of violence, as the Court found in Short v Short, is a protection order the correct response or are civil procedural remedies best placed to restrain it? This case note discusses the concept of abusive litigation and the Family Court’s and High Court’s analysis, which frame the father as a misguided LiP. It argues that abusive litigation should be analysed as violence, not as vexatious litigation. It also argues that courts should maintain a coercive control lens when deciding cases of this nature, so that the courts will be better equipped to recognise and respond to this form of abuse. (From the introduction). Record 8215
650			_aABUSED WOMEN _925
650			_aCOERCIVE CONTROL _95771
650			_aEVIDENCE _9237
650			_aFAMILY COURT _9241
650			_aFAMILY LAW _9244
650			_aHIGH COURT _912011
650			_aINTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE _9431
650			_aJUSTICE _9333
650			_aPERPETRATORS _92644
650			_aPROTECTION ORDERS _9470
650		4	_aPSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE _9472
650		4	_aVICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE _9624
651		4	_aNEW ZEALAND _92588
773	0		_tNew Zealand Women's Law Journal - Te Aho Kawe Kaupapa Ture a ngā Wāhine, 2022, 7: 64-76
830			_aNew Zealand Women's Law Journal - Te Aho Kawe Kaupapa Ture a ngā Wāhine _97305
856			_uhttps://static1.squarespace.com/static/577228a5e4fcb512c064f2a7/t/639f7cbf95d09454d4c7e7b2/1671396548042/Dr+B+Toy-Cronin.pdf _zRead the article
856			_uhttp://www.womenslawjournal.co.nz/edition-seven _yNZWLJ, Volume 7, 2022
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE _hnews120