Dickie v. Dickie (2007)

Download factum:
Download media release:
Download media advisory:

Dickie is a family law case that deals with the recourses and remedies available when parties, overwhelmingly men, are in breach of family court orders. The case specifically addresses whether the default of an order to provide security for costs or security for the payment of support obligations is punishable by a contempt of court order.

The respondent in this case, Dr. Kenneth Dickie, a man of means and resources, who, rather than meet his obligations to his former wife and children, chose instead to use the courts to further their disadvantage. Dr. Dickie did not appeal the outstanding support orders against him, nor did he apply to vary them - he simply refused to comply with them.

LEAF argued that the decision about what recourses and remedies are available when men are in breach of family court orders should be made in consideration of the sex inequality so often associated with support orders, and in a way that is consistent with section 15 Charter equality values. When men refuse to comply with family court orders, it can have serious economic consequences for women. For example, for women with two children living on $1500/month, $800/month in support can make the difference between being able to pay the rent or not. LEAF argued that for family law to work for women, contempt of court proceedings must be available to be applied to men who refuse to comply with family court orders.

The Supreme Court unanimously agreed that men must be held accountable to their family law obligations. The decision is consistent with LEAF's position that men such as Dr. Dickie who continue to willfully disobey family court orders should be found in contempt of court. Ninety-seven percent of parents trying to avoid child support payments are men, and the problem of women and children living in poverty following relationship breakdowns has been recognized by the Supreme Court.

The ruling should have a significant impact on the ability of women to resolve the problem of men who abuse the family justice system so as to perpetuate the exercise of power and control over them.

Supporting documents
(LEAF not responsible for content hosted by external links)

Supreme Court of Canada Decision (2007)