Mother jailed for 4 months for contravention

Mother jailed for 4 months for contravention

In the recent case ofB & D,

Federal Magistrate Jarrett jailed the mother for 4 months for breaching orders of the Family Court to allow the father to spend time with the children on the first occasion following a trial, and making a final order for the children to live with the father.

It should be noted that the length of time in jail, under the Family Law Act, is not subject to the usual reduction of time with State laws, meaning that 4 months is 4 months.

The mother had previously been subject to a bond for an earlier breach. His Honour was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she would not comply with the orders of the Family Court and that it was not appropriate to suspend the term of imprisonment.

She was living 5 hours away from the contact centre. She claimed that she could not afford to take the children, although she had transport and the father did not.

The mother cannot say she was not warned. This is what Jordan J told her at the trial:

I acknowledge that imposes some financial hardship upon the mother. It is a hardship that should have been in the mother’s contemplations when she chose to move five hours away and that she may be required, and, indeed, that she was so required at the time she unilaterally moved to facilitate the children’s relationship with their father. Accordingly, without denying the reality of the hardship, it is something the mother now needs to deal with in terms of meeting her obligations to care for the children and to facilitate the children’s relationship with their father, which is one of her primary responsibilities. It is on that basis that I propose to make those orders.


If you defy the orders of the Court, then you will have the bear the consequences. Otherwise, there is no purpose in having Courts. Otherwise, there is nothing to stop the father from taking these two children from you and going into hiding. The only thing that stands between you and that prospect is the authority of the Court. If people cannot reach agreement, they come to Court. People must abide by the orders of this Court or there is anarchy. You do not want that, the father does not want that, the children do not need it, and I will not tolerate it. Adjourn the Court, thank you.

Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Forced Marriage

On November 1st 2023, Accredited Family Law Specialist and Page Provan Director Stephen Page presented a paper at the Brisbane Zonta Club about forced marriage. I acknowledge the Jagera and Turrbal peoples, on whose lands we meet today, their elders, past, present and emerging. Ruqia Hidari was aged 21 and living in Victoria, when, according to police,… Read More »Forced Marriage

ACT Government Surrogacy Bill

The ACT Government has today introduced a bill to amend the ACT’s surrogacy laws. The proposed changes are more incremental than fundamental. They include allowing a single person to undertake surrogacy, for the surrogate to be single if needed, a requirement for legal advice and counselling beforehand, a written agreement being required, that traditional surrogacy is… Read More »ACT Government Surrogacy Bill

Planning to resolve: ADR in ART

ADR can help resolve disputes in ART cases. ADR is not limited to mediation and arbitration. Other types of informal dispute resolution can resolve disputes. When assisted reproductive treatment cases go off the rails, they can have the next level of bitterness and volatility. There can be a keen sense of betrayal when things don’t… Read More »Planning to resolve: ADR in ART

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board