Wolkowicz and Wolkowicz (No. 3)

In the matter of *Wolkowicz and Wolkowicz (No. 3)*, Justice Cronin of the Family Court of Australia considered allegations of contravention of court orders brought against the respondent wife. The dispute centred on three specific allegations of such contravention, which the wife was required to answer.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether it was appropriate to proceed with the hearing and determination of the contravention allegations pursuant to section 112AP(1)(b) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), and whether the requirements of Rule 21.02(1) of the Family Law Rules should be dispensed with. The Court was also required to determine if each of the three allegations was proved and, if so, whether the wife's conduct constituted a flagrant challenge to the authority of the Court.

Justice Cronin found that it was appropriate to hear and determine the allegations under section 112AP(1)(b) and dispensed with the requirement of Rule 21.02(1). The Court concluded that each of the three allegations was proved, finding the wife guilty of contravening orders made under the *Family Law Act*. This conduct was deemed to involve a flagrant challenge to the Court. Consequently, the wife was sentenced to twelve months imprisonment. However, the Court ordered that the wife could apply for release upon the settlement of the sale of a specified property and the purchaser taking possession, on the basis of a desire to purge her contempt. The Court also requested an urgent psychiatric evaluation of the wife and ordered that all other outstanding applications be dismissed.