Cluny & Skinner (No 2)

In the matter of *Cluny & Skinner (No 2)*, Kent J of the Family Court of Australia considered contempt proceedings against the husband, Mr Skinner, and his contravention of financial orders. The contempt arose from the husband's actions in obtaining a replacement passport after depositing his original passport with the wife's solicitors as per a court order, by making a false declaration to the relevant department. The wife sought a two-year term of imprisonment for this contempt, while the husband had also failed to meet significant financial obligations, totalling over $280,000, stemming from orders made in 2013.

The court was required to determine the appropriate sanctions for both the contempt and the contravention of financial orders. Specifically, it needed to assess the severity of the husband's conduct in obtaining a new passport and the consequences of his ongoing failure to satisfy substantial cash payments, including maintenance, child support, arrears, and costs. The court also had to consider the husband's offer to satisfy the financial liabilities by transferring his superannuation and the wife's refusal of this offer.

Kent J reasoned that the husband's conduct in obtaining a replacement passport constituted a flagrant challenge to the authority of the Court, warranting a significant penalty. However, in light of the husband's offer to pay the wife's costs on an indemnity basis and his proposal to satisfy the financial orders through his superannuation, the court imposed a fine of $30,000 for the contempt. For the contravention of financial orders, the husband was afforded a further 24 months to pay the outstanding sum of $288,562.13, plus any further amounts due and interest, and costs of $91,664.00, with payment due by 31 July 2019. In default of these payments, the husband was ordered to attend court on 1 August 2019 to show cause why he should not be imprisoned for three months, with a warrant of arrest to issue in the event of his non-appearance.