When an order for regular payment of money is not obeyed, who may have the family court order detention of the payer?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
For this exercise, the practice file would hold the order for regular payment of money the person received, showing under which provision it was made, the due dates and amounts it set, and the record of payments actually made, since the provision turns on periods passed without performance.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading keeps every condition attached: the family court may order detention only on the right-holder's application, only by a ruling, and only against a person who has received an order for regular payment of money and has then failed, without just cause, for at least the number of periods the provision sets; the detention stays within the range the provision sets and lasts only until the obligation is performed.
Another reading marks what the provision leaves open: it does not say what counts as a just cause, how a period is counted or proved, or how the file records each payment date, so the grounds for finding a failure 'without just cause' have to come from the papers rather than from this text.
Your judgment
Where a payer missed the required number of periods but says the payment route was blocked, how should the record show whether the cause was just?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change which orders reach a detention order or the number of periods required, or if a court decision explains how periods are counted or what counts as a just cause.