A coercive fine may be imposed to ensure contact between parents and children

Following a separation, a father obtained a court ruling granting him contact rights to two of his children. The judgment provided for a step-up plan, beginning with supervised contact before progressing to ordinary arrangements. However, many visits did not take place, leading the father to request that the mother be imposed a fine for non-compliance.

The District Court imposed a coercive fine on the mother, but the Court of Appeal reached the opposite conclusion, arguing that the initial phase of the step-up plan phase had not been followed.

As opposed to the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court concluded that a coercive fine may still be imposed, even though the step-up plan has not been followed. The Court of Appeal’s order was set aside. 

The Supreme Court noted that the purpose of section 65 of the Children Act is to ensure that contact rights based on the best interests of the child are implemented as intended. To achieve this, the conclusion of the judgment must be interpreted in the light of the reasoning. As long as the scope and nature of the contact remain unchanged, the court is relatively free to establish practical arrangements in the child’s best interests, even where the original step-up plan has not been followed. The Supreme Court further noted that such an approach is consistent with Article 104 of the Constitution, which prioritises the child’s best interests, and supports international conventions by preventing one parent from obstructing enforcement.

This ruling provides guidance on the interpretation of section 65 of the Children Act and the possibility to impose a coercive fine on a parent who obstructs contact.

Read the order from the Supreme Court (PDF)

Area of law: Children law. Section 65 of the Children Act. 

Key paragraphs: 39, 49

Justices: Webster, Bull, Østenensen Berglund, Thyness, Lund