The applicant father brought a motion seeking to hold the respondent mother in contempt for allegedly breaching multiple provisions of a prior consent order governing parenting time, counselling, communication, and payment obligations.
The court emphasized that contempt in family law proceedings is a remedy of last resort requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a clear order was wilfully disobeyed.
The court also held that an arbitrator lacks jurisdiction to determine or punish contempt of court and questioned the validity of a prior arbitration-based contempt penalty incorporated into a court order.
After reviewing each alleged breach, the court found the evidence insufficient to establish deliberate non-compliance.
The motion was dismissed and the respondent was entitled to seek costs.
