In a recent decision of the Family Court, it was ordered that a mother serve an immediate term of imprisonment of 14 days and further that she be subject to a further term of imprisonment of 14 days which will be fully suspended.
This arose because the mother had failed on numerous occasions to allow her child to spend time with the child’s father when there were orders in place for the child to be with the father. She had given an undertaking to the Court in the following terms:
“I undertake to the Court that for a period of 24 months from the giving of this undertaking I will comply with the terms of any parenting order in force from time to time in relation to my child.
I acknowledge that should it be proven that I have not complied with the condition of this bond that I may be required to pay a fine not exceeding 10 penalty units (a penalty unit is currently $222) and I will be liable to be dealt with again for contravening orders that required me to provide my child to her Father.
And further that I will be liable to have the order suspending the 14 days terms of imprisonment in relation to the previous contravention terminated resulting in me being imprisoned for a period of 14 days.”
Her solicitor noted that he had explained to her in language likely to be readily understood by her:
The Judge found that the fact the contravention occurred whilst the mother was subject to a bond renders it again more serious in its proper context. The second and third contraventions further had the effect of derailing the assessment process to prepare the matter for trial, resulting in a delay of the trial.
Again, in the context of a strong and recent history of non-compliance and in the context of occurring in the currency of a bond, it should be considered that these are more serious contraventions. The Judge was satisfied that the three counts are more serious beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is necessary to consider whether each matter that points to a sanction of imprisonment, fines, or community service order is established beyond a reasonable doubt. An order for imprisonment can be made under Division 13A of Part VII of the Family Law Act.
The Court must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of firstly all of the factual matters that relate to the finding of contravention and secondly, that the contravention is a “more serious contravention” to which the more serious and more punitive powers contained in Subdivision F of Division 13A apply and thirdly, the Court must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the inappropriateness of other available sanctions.
The Judge stated that the suspension of that previous term of imprisonment was the last hope of compliance without incarcerating the mother. It was a hope that was misplaced.
The Judge was persuaded that it was only gaol time, albeit as short as possible a period, that will cause the mother to comply with orders whereas previously, he was persuaded that having such a term hanging over the mother’s head would be sufficient or sufficiently salutary.
The Judge observed that it is contrary to the child’s best interest for the mother to be non-compliant with the Court orders and that to achieve compliance, it is necessary that the mother serve the time that was previously suspended.
Accordingly, the order for suspension was terminated and it was ordered that the mother serve 14 days imprisonment in respect of the contraventions.
To learn more about this, please contact the team at James Noble Law for a FREE 20-minute consultation today to schedule an appointment with one of our Qualified and experienced family lawyers Brisbane.
Find Brisbane family lawyers on Google Maps near you.
You may also like to know more information about the