“To date the Superior Court of Justice has awarded monetary penalties against parties who are in breach of family court orders.
In each of Granofsky v. Lambersky, 2019 ONSC 3251, and Di Poce v. Di Poce, 2022 ONSC 2099, the courts relied on Rules 1(8) which provides that if a person fails to obey a court order, “the court may deal with that person’s breach by making any order that it considers necessary for a just determination of the matter. Rule 1(8) then sets out a non-exhaustive list of enforcement remedies, including, on motion, contempt.
While the list of enforcement remedies do not expressly include the assessment of a monetary penalty for non-compliance with a court order (unless by motion for contempt which does provide for a monetary penalty), the court in these two decisions have in fact added a monetary penalty as part of the court order enforcement arsenal, without the need to bring a motion for contempt of court.
However, in Altman v. Altman, 2022 ONSC 4479, Faieta J. declined to impose a monetary penalty for breach of a family court order on the basis that ordering a monetary penalty payable to a party is expressly dealt with by Rule 31(5)(c) of the Family Law Rules as a remedy for contempt. As noted by the Court of Appeal in Bouchard v. Sgovio, 2021 ONCA 709, without deciding the issue, there are limits to the enforcement remedies a court can impose for non-compliance with court orders under r. 1(8) short of contempt. Contempt, along with the sanctions that can be assessed for contempt, must be proven on the evidentiary standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. Conversely, the remedies for non-compliance set out in Rule 1(8) must be proven on the lower threshold evidentiary standard of a balance of probabilities.”
Nodder v. Wasserman, 2023 ONSC 6982 (CanLII) at 31-34