Legal Tip 264: 12 Months Imprisonment with withdrawing from a Loan – Contempt of Court

Not complying with court orders can lead a person to get into serious trouble.

In family law property settlement case the husband was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment because:
- he withdrew $231,807 from a loan account, and then
- failed to make 48 months of repayments as required

The wife was to receive the house unencumbered (and the husband other assets) and the 48 monthly repayments were required to pay out the loan and discharge the mortgage.

The husband blamed his failing business for his need to breach the court orders.

The wife was the one who brought proceedings to court.


See:

Parrish & Gallejo (No.2) [2018] FCCA 2851

Parrish & Gallejo (No.2) [2018] FCCA 2851 (3 August 2018)

 

A woman scorned hell haveth no fury.

 

Here is another case where there was a 3 year sentence imposed on the Mr

Campbell & Louis (Sentencing) [2021] FCWA 64
CAMPBELL and LOUIS (SENTENCING) [2021] FCWA 64 (15 April 2021)

 

Interesting story where a judge sent someone to prison unlawfully and they are now suing the judge personally:

Judge sued for $2m after wrongly jailing man who was assaulted and threatened with rape by inmates, court told

 

He has some basis of "record" for decisions and the Crown then meeting subsequent costs. Appeals against his decisions are somewhat in favour of the appellant. The usual protections afforded judges are being tested for actions outside authority

Could Salvatore Vasta be Australia's worst judge? said the AFR

 

Seems pretty hard to hide money from the family law court. Might be best to just become a sugar daddy.

 

Zamir [2022] FedCFamC1A 193
Zamir & Zamir [2022] FedCFamC1A 193 (24 November 2022)

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – Contempt – Where the husband appeals against a sentence of imprisonment for six months for three findings of contempt – Where the wife conceded the appeal must be allowed – Errors of law – Where in respect of the first count the husband’s technical breach could not reasonably be construed as a flagrant challenge to the Court’s authority – Where in respect of the second count the wife bore the burden of proving the husband’s contempt beyond reasonable doubt and failed to do so – Where in respect of the third count the primary judge could only have found the husband’s contempt proven in respect of a lesser sum of money than the charge alleged – Sanction – Where a single global sanction precludes an isolated challenge to the correctness of any one particular count – Where the sanction must be set aside when the underlying findings of contempt are erroneous – Appeal allowed.

The husband transferred property overseas after interim orders where made preventing this. The court sentenced him to 6 months imprisonment! But the husband won on appeal

[66] It is a fundamental principle of common law that the imposition of a custodial sentence ought be the sanction of last resort (Boulton v R [2014] VSCA 342). The primary judge’s reasons offer no explanation for why a fine, security for good behaviour, or suspended sentence of imprisonment were rejected as inadequate sanctions. Nor do the reasons explicate why a full-time custodial sentence of six months was chosen.”

 

Female judge?

 

I don't know, but there were 3 of them on the appeal.