(1) The circumstances
in which a person may be taken to have had, for the purposes of this Division,
a reasonable excuse for contravening an order under this Act affecting
children include, but are not limited to, the circumstances set out in
subsections (2), (4), (5), (6) and (7).
(2) A person (the
respondent ) is taken to have had a reasonable excuse for contravening an
order under this Act affecting children if —
(a) the
respondent contravened the order because, or substantially because, he or she
did not, at the time of the contravention, understand the obligations imposed
by the order on the person who was bound by it; and
(b) a
court is satisfied that the respondent ought to be excused in respect of the
contravention.
(3) If a court decides
that a person had a reasonable excuse for contravening an order under this Act
for the reason referred to in subsection (2)(a), it is the duty of the court
to explain to the person, in language likely to be readily understood by the
person, the obligations imposed on him or her by the order and the
consequences that may follow if he or she again contravenes the order.
(4) A person (the
respondent ) is taken to have had a reasonable excuse for contravening a
parenting order to the extent to which it deals with whom a child is to live
with in a way that resulted in the child not living with a person in whose
favour the order was made if —
(a) the
respondent believed on reasonable grounds that the actions constituting the
contravention were necessary to protect the health or safety of a person
(including the respondent or the child); and
(b) the
period during which, because of the contravention, the child did not live with
the person in whose favour the order was made was not longer than was
necessary to protect the health or safety of the person referred to in
paragraph (a).
(5) A person (the
respondent ) is taken to have had a reasonable excuse for contravening a
parenting order to the extent to which it deals with whom a child is to spend
time with in a way that resulted in a person and a child not spending time
together as provided for in the order if —
(a) the
respondent believed on reasonable grounds that not allowing the child and the
person to spend time together was necessary to protect the health or safety of
a person (including the respondent or the child); and
(b) the
period during which, because of the contravention, the child and the person
did not spend time together was not longer than was necessary to protect the
health or safety of the person referred to in paragraph (a).
(6) A person (the
respondent ) is taken to have had a reasonable excuse for contravening a
parenting order to the extent to which it deals with whom a child is to
communicate with in a way that resulted in a person and a child not having the
communication provided for under the order if —
(a) the
respondent believed on reasonable grounds that not allowing the child and the
person to communicate together was necessary to protect the health or safety
of a person (including the respondent or the child); and
(b) the
period during which, because of the contravention, the child and the person
did not communicate was not longer than was necessary to protect the health or
safety of the person referred to in paragraph (a).
(7) A person (the
respondent ) is taken to have had a reasonable excuse for contravening a
parenting order to which section 98A applies by acting contrary to section 98A
if —
(a) the
respondent believed on reasonable grounds that the action constituting the
contravention was necessary to protect the health or safety of a person
(including the respondent or the child); and
(b) the
period during which, because of that action, a person in whose favour the
order was made was hindered in or prevented from discharging responsibilities
under the order was not for longer than was necessary to protect the health or
safety of the person referred to in paragraph (a).
[Section 205E inserted: No. 35 of 2006 s. 101.]