Kenta and Nemelia (No. 2)

In *Kenta & Nemelia (No. 2)* [2013] FamCA 486, the Family Court of Australia considered a contravention application brought by Mr Kenta against Ms Nemelia. The dispute concerned allegations that the respondent mother had failed to comply with court orders made on 29 October 2012, specifically by preventing the children from communicating with their father via Skype or telephone.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the father's contravention application, and his subsequent amended application, were sufficiently particularised to proceed. The court was required to determine if the statement of alleged contravention provided adequate detail to enable the respondent to understand and respond to the charges of non-compliance.

Justice Aldridge found that the statement of alleged contravention was not precise enough to enable the application to proceed. The court held that allegations of contravention must be specific, detailing conduct on particular days, rather than making general assertions over extended periods. The amended application was also found to be deficient, as subsequent conduct required a fresh application. Consequently, the father's contravention application was dismissed. The court noted that this dismissal did not determine the underlying issues and that the father was at liberty to file a fresh, properly particularised application.