Cluny & Skinner

In the matter of *Cluny & Skinner*, Kent J of the Family Court of Australia considered allegations of contempt and contravention of court orders brought by the wife against the husband. The dispute involved the husband's alleged failure to comply with orders requiring him to surrender his passport and to make significant financial payments, totalling over $250,000. The husband admitted to the conduct in question but contended that his actions did not constitute a breach of the orders or that he had a reasonable excuse for his non-compliance.

The court was required to determine whether the husband's actions amounted to contempt of court, specifically a flagrant challenge to the authority of the court, in relation to the passport order. This involved construing the terms of the order and assessing whether the husband's conduct, including obtaining a replacement passport and travelling internationally, breached its requirements. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the husband had contravened the financial orders without reasonable excuse, considering his defence of impecuniosity.

Kent J found that the husband's application for and failure to deposit his replacement passport with the wife's solicitors constituted contemptuous conduct, involving a flagrant challenge to the court's authority. The court also found that the husband had contravened the financial orders without reasonable excuse, rejecting his claim of impecuniosity due to adverse credit findings. The court declared the total amount owing by the husband to the wife under various orders, including child support, spouse maintenance, and arrears, and adjourned further hearings to determine appropriate sanctions for the contempt and penalties for the contraventions.