SPARGO & SPARGO

In *Spargo & Spargo*, the father alleged that the mother had contravened court orders on six occasions. The mother conceded that her conduct would ordinarily constitute a breach of the orders but contended that she had a reasonable excuse for her actions. Her stated belief, held on reasonable grounds, was that the father would expose the children to pornography and inappropriate or explicit material. The mother had reported these concerns to the police, and gave evidence that she was advised by police to suspend the father's time with the children. The court was asked to determine whether the mother had contravened the orders and, if so, whether she had established a reasonable excuse for those contraventions.

The court found that the mother had indeed contravened the orders as alleged in each of the six counts. However, the court also found that the mother had established a reasonable excuse for these contraventions. This finding was based on the mother's genuine and reasonably held belief regarding the risk of exposure to inappropriate material, her reporting of these concerns to the police, and the subsequent advice received from the police.

Consequently, the court ordered that the mother had contravened the orders of 13 November 2013 in relation to the six allegations, but that she had a reasonable excuse for doing so. The proceedings were adjourned to a later date for the court to consider any consequential orders.