In a high-conflict family law enforcement motion under Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules, the father sought to enforce an arbitration award requiring the mother to ensure the 17 and 15-year-old children attend reunification therapy.
On its own initiative, the court raised the issue of whether it had jurisdiction to order a Voice of the Child report.
The court held that it had jurisdiction under the Family Law Rules, its inherent jurisdiction to control its process, and its parens patriae jurisdiction.
Given the children's ages and the potential impact of the enforcement order on them, the court ordered a privately funded Voice of the Child report before proceeding with the enforcement motion.
