Enforcement · Ontario

Contempt of Court Applications: What Are the Possible Outcomes?

Contempt is the remedy people reach for first when an order is broken, and the one courts grant least readily. Here is the test, the range of outcomes, and when something else works better.

By Vanessa Tynes, family lawyer · Published 2 October 2026

When a court order is broken, contempt is the remedy people reach for first. It is also the remedy courts grant least readily. Understanding why is the difference between a motion that achieves something and one that costs you money and makes your case worse.

What a contempt motion is

Contempt in family proceedings is governed by Rule 31 of the Family Law Rules. The rule opens with an important limit: an order other than a payment order may be enforced by a contempt motion.

That carve-out matters. Support, costs and equalization payments are payment orders, and they are enforced through other machinery: the Family Responsibility Office, writs of seizure and sale, garnishment, and the enforcement rules dealing with default. A contempt motion is not the route for unpaid support.

Contempt is instead aimed at orders requiring a person to do something, or to stop doing something: produce disclosure, return a child, comply with a parenting schedule, vacate a home, transfer property, stop disposing of assets.

The test

The Supreme Court of Canada set out the test in Carey v. Laiken in 2015. Three elements must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. The order must state clearly and unequivocally what is required or prohibited. If the order is capable of more than one reasonable reading, the motion fails.
2. The person must have had actual knowledge of the order.
3. The person must have intentionally done the act the order prohibits, or intentionally failed to do the act the order compels.

The first element defeats a great many motions. An order providing that parenting time will be "as agreed between the parties" or "as arranged" is not clear and unequivocal, because it does not specify what either person must actually do. Orders requiring someone to be "reasonable" or to "co-operate" have the same problem. If you are relying on an order to enforce behaviour, the wording has to be capable of being breached in an identifiable way.

The discretion, even where the test is met

Proving the three elements does not guarantee a finding. The judge retains a discretion to decline, and in family cases that discretion is exercised often.

The Ontario Court of Appeal has repeatedly described contempt as a remedy of last resort, and has warned specifically against its use in parenting disputes where other remedies are available, where a finding would inflame the conflict, and where the children's interests would be harmed rather than helped. Chong v. Donnelly in 2019 and Ruffudeen-Coutts v. Coutts in 2012 are the decisions most often cited for that proposition.

A judge who is satisfied the order was breached may still decline to make a finding and instead address the problem another way.

The possible outcomes

1. The motion is dismissed

The most common outcome. Typically because the order was ambiguous, intention was not established to the criminal standard, or the court concluded a less drastic remedy was available. Costs may be ordered against the party who brought the motion.

2. Adjourned with an opportunity to comply

The court may adjourn the motion on terms, giving the responding party a defined window to do what the order required. If they comply, the motion often ends there.

3. A finding of contempt, with sanctions deferred

Contempt is frequently dealt with in two stages: first a determination of whether contempt occurred, then a separate hearing on what should happen about it. The gap gives the person a chance to purge the contempt, and purging it genuinely affects the sanction.

4. A finding of contempt, with sanctions imposed

Rule 31 gives the court a wide range of options on a finding of contempt, including:

• imprisonment, for any period and on any conditions that are just;
• a fine in any amount the court considers appropriate;
• payment of an amount to a party as a penalty;
• an order to do, or to stop doing, something;
• payment of costs in any amount;
• an order to obey any other order; and
• anything else the court decides is appropriate.

The rule also permits a writ of sequestration against the person's property, and allows imprisonment or a fine to be suspended on conditions. Imprisonment is rare and generally reserved for repeated, deliberate defiance, frequently in cases involving the withholding of a child.

5. Costs

Costs are the practical consequence in most contempt motions that succeed. Because contempt involves deliberate disobedience of a court order, successful motions often attract costs on a full recovery basis. The reverse is equally true: an unsuccessful contempt motion can be an expensive mistake.

6. Consequences for parenting arrangements

Separately from the contempt finding itself, the court may order make-up parenting time, vary parenting time or decision making responsibility, add a police enforcement clause, or require counselling or the involvement of a parenting coordinator. In many cases these are the orders that actually solve the problem.

The alternatives, which are often better

• A motion to enforce or to clarify. Where the real problem is that the order is vague, fixing the wording is worth more than a contempt finding.
• A motion to change. Where the order no longer works, persistent breach is sometimes a signal that it needs to be varied rather than enforced.
• Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules. Where a party fails to obey an order, the court has a broad power to strike out documents, dismiss a claim, postpone a step in the case, order costs and make other orders. It is easier to obtain than contempt, carries no criminal standard of proof, and is frequently the more effective tool, particularly for disclosure failures.
• Enforcement under the Children's Law Reform Act for parenting orders, including provisions permitting apprehension of a child in defined circumstances.

Practical points before you bring one

• Read the order as a stranger would. If a reasonable person could read it another way, expect the motion to fail.
• Fix ambiguity first. Getting precise wording into an order today is worth more than a contempt motion in six months.
• Document everything. Dates, times, messages, missed exchanges, and what was said at the time. A contempt motion is proven on specifics, not on a narrative of how difficult the other party is.
• Prove knowledge. Be ready to show the person knew of the order and what it required.
• Weigh the cost of being wrong. A failed contempt motion costs money, damages credibility, and hardens a case that may still need to settle.

Used in the right case, a contempt motion is a powerful tool and sometimes the only one that works. Used reflexively, as an expression of frustration, it usually backfires.

This article is general information about Ontario family law, current to October 2026. It is not legal advice and it is not a substitute for advice about your own situation. Family law changes, and the outcome in any case depends on its own facts. Reading this page does not create a lawyer and client relationship.