FLAST CASE SUMMARY: Nathan & Merrill [2018] Contravention-Penalty
Nathan & Merrill [2018] FamCA 994 (27 November 2018)
Can you contravene parenting orders by posting information about proceedings, the children, or the other party on social media?
Yes, you can!
The father in this case posted a video, created a Facebook page and posted photographs and commentaries of the children. He gave an interview, which resulted in an article being published on an online newspaper and in the print newspaper and then set up an online petition calling for the mother’s re-trial. Further videos were posted of both children.
There were consent orders in place prohibiting the above actions.
The mother filed for contravention of orders and the father was penalised.
ANYTHING you say or post on social media whether intentional, implied, and mistaken, may be used as evidence in Court.
This is why at FLAST.COM.AU we are managing it quite strictly in terms of member privacy.
FACTS SUMMARY:
- The Mother and Father have two children, X born 2014 and Y born 2016.
- 21 February 2018, consent orders were made.
- The consent orders outlined the prohibition of posting on social media or publishing on a web page anything that references to the proceedings, the children or the other party.
- The Father posted social media posts and the online news article that clearly identifies by narrative and pictures the parties and the children.
- 25 June 2018, Mother files for contravention of orders.
- 5 October 2018, the father filed his own Affidavit conceding that he did not intend to defend or dispute the allegations.
- 24 October 2018, the father admitted the breaches of the order and conceded that he did so without reasonable excuse.
ISSUE:
What is the appropriate penalty for the father for contravening the orders?
HELD:
It was held on the balance of punishment and deterrent the father is to enter into a Bond for a period of nine months with a condition that he is of good behaviour.
The Judge took into account the father had a ready submission that he contravened the orders.
In determining the contravention and penalty, the Judge looked to the sections of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth), concerning applications for contravention of orders that are contained in Division 13A of Part VIIof the Act. It was established that the contravention was found to have occurred and without reasonable excuse with the contravention being “more serious” (sub-div F).
Although the father asserts he has removed the content from social media, the concern is the situation may not be resolved, third parties may still be promoting and distributing the story and the children’s identity is now known to the public.
The Judge states the fathers conduct has “showed a serious disregard” of his requirements of the order, and that his behaviour was intentional and appalling.