Under the child abuse special provisions, who carries the costs of a temporary measure or protective disposition, and when does the state step in instead?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file we read the decision or ruling that imposed the temporary measure or the protective disposition on the child abuse perpetrator, since the duty in the provision attaches only to those who have received one. We also read any costing, claim or payment papers for the entrustment or disposition, and any record bearing on whether the perpetrator has the means to pay.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the main clause as a rule of responsibility: a child abuse perpetrator who has received a temporary measure for entrustment or a protective disposition of the kinds the provision names bears the costs necessary for that entrustment or disposition, so the duty follows from the measure having been imposed rather than from any separate finding.
Another reading turns on the proviso: where the perpetrator has no ability to pay, the state may bear the costs, and the word 'may' leaves it open what shows such an inability, since the provision sets no standard, while the calculation, claim and payment procedures for the costs are left to Supreme Court Rules.
Your judgment
What in the file could persuade the deciding body that the perpetrator's inability to pay is genuine rather than merely asserted?
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 who bears the costs or to define inability to pay, or if Supreme Court Rules made under it set the calculation and payment procedure in detail.