A lawyer charged with hitting a man in her car has lost a bid to have her name suppressed.
An Auckland lawyer who has been charged with striking a man in her SUV has lost a High Court bid for name suppression.
Natalie Sharon Tabb is currently facing two charges of assault with a weapon from the incident last year, where it is alleged she hit a man twice with her car whilst he was removing property from her home back in June.
According to Justice Christian Whata’s summary of events, Tabb had arrived home to find her husband, from whom she had recently separated, removing property from the home with the help of mover.
“The broader context is a domestic dispute. Ms Tabb arrived at her home to find her husband removing property with the assistance of a furniture removal company,” Whata said, denying Tabb’s bid to have her name suppressed, despite her lawyer arguing that the client, a self-employed solicitor, would face hardship if her name was released.
According to Stuff, the victim suffered a bruised thigh and a fractured finger.
Tabb’s contention was that she drove her car across the driveway to attempt to block the furniture truck from leaving while the victim stood at the rear of the car.
“She said she tried to get out the way of the truck as it was leaving the property as she thought it was going to crash into her,” Tabb’s lawyer said.
“The issue is, was she even aware that he was there? That [will be] a matter for the jury.”
Whata said that while Tabb might suffer embarrassment from the publication of her name, her argument for name suppression did not meet the requirement for ‘extreme hardship’.
The case will go to trial later this year.
Natalie Sharon Tabb is currently facing two charges of assault with a weapon from the incident last year, where it is alleged she hit a man twice with her car whilst he was removing property from her home back in June.
According to Justice Christian Whata’s summary of events, Tabb had arrived home to find her husband, from whom she had recently separated, removing property from the home with the help of mover.
“The broader context is a domestic dispute. Ms Tabb arrived at her home to find her husband removing property with the assistance of a furniture removal company,” Whata said, denying Tabb’s bid to have her name suppressed, despite her lawyer arguing that the client, a self-employed solicitor, would face hardship if her name was released.
According to Stuff, the victim suffered a bruised thigh and a fractured finger.
Tabb’s contention was that she drove her car across the driveway to attempt to block the furniture truck from leaving while the victim stood at the rear of the car.
“She said she tried to get out the way of the truck as it was leaving the property as she thought it was going to crash into her,” Tabb’s lawyer said.
“The issue is, was she even aware that he was there? That [will be] a matter for the jury.”
Whata said that while Tabb might suffer embarrassment from the publication of her name, her argument for name suppression did not meet the requirement for ‘extreme hardship’.
The case will go to trial later this year.
