The applicant mother brought a motion to find the respondent father in contempt of a temporary parenting order, alleging he intentionally undermined her relationship with their 13-year-old child, resulting in the child refusing parenting time.
The court dismissed the motion, finding insufficient evidence to prove contempt beyond a reasonable doubt or a failure to obey under Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules.
The court gave significant weight to the child's clear and consistent views expressing a desire to reside with the father, and ordered the parties to continue family counselling rather than utilizing the blunt instrument of contempt.
