EGAN & ROBSON

In *Egan & Robson*, the father alleged that the mother had contravened final consent orders concerning their child. The alleged contraventions included refusing to facilitate the child spending time with the father, failing to provide a sickness certificate, and attending medical appointments with the child without the father's consent or providing details of treatment. The mother admitted some of these allegations but claimed reasonable excuse, including that the child desired a break from seeing the father. She also denied certain breaches, asserting the orders did not apply to the specific medical professional the child attended.

The court was required to determine whether the mother had contravened the final consent orders and, if so, whether she had a reasonable excuse for any admitted contraventions. The central legal issues revolved around the interpretation and application of the consent orders in the context of the mother's actions and her stated justifications.

Justice Berman found that contraventions of the orders had been proven. While the mother raised defences such as the child's wishes and the scope of the orders regarding medical treatment, the court was not persuaded that these constituted a reasonable excuse for the proven breaches. The court's reasoning focused on the established fact of the breaches and the absence of a legally sufficient justification for them.

Consequently, the proceedings were adjourned for sentencing submissions, with the court scheduling a date for the parties to address the appropriate penalty for the contraventions.