Skip to content

Astreinte Application — Template

An astreinte is a per-breach financial penalty that compounds automatically. It is significantly more effective than flat fines because the cost to the alienating parent grows with each new breach — without you having to re-litigate.

The mechanism exists across Belgian, French, and Dutch civil procedure. Many family-law practitioners under-use it; you may need to ask explicitly.

The four-step procedural ask

Step 1 — Identify the contact-order clause being breached

Quote it verbatim. Example (BE): "De vader heeft recht op contact met het kind elke woensdagavond van 17h tot 20h en elk tweede weekend van vrijdagavond 18h tot zondagavond 18h."

Step 2 — Document the breaches

Use your contact log. For an astreinte motion, you want a minimum of 5-10 documented breaches over a 2-3 month window. Each breach should have a date, the verbatim refusal, and a documentary source.

Step 3 — File the astreinte motion

The request typically includes:

  • The exact clause being breached (Step 1).
  • The schedule of documented breaches (Step 2).
  • The proposed astreinte amount per breach (typically €100-500 per incident — adapt to local norms and the obstructing parent's means).
  • The trigger condition (e.g. "per missed handover not justified within 24 hours by a treating medical professional's note").
  • The cap or duration (some jurisdictions require an upper limit).

Step 4 — Reference the statutory basis

Jurisdiction Statutory authority Notes
Belgium Code judiciaire Art. 1385bis–1385nonies Cour de cassation has confirmed astreintes apply to contact orders. Pair with a request that the President of the Tribunal de la famille set the rate.
France Code des procédures civiles d'exécution (CPCE) L. 131-1 to L. 131-4 The juge de l'exécution sets and liquidates. Often paired with Art. 373-2-6 Code civil contact-obstruction findings.
Netherlands Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering (Rv) Art. 611a–h The dwangsom (Dutch equivalent of astreinte) is granted by the rechter who issues the underlying order.

Why it works

Unlike a flat fine (which the alienating parent often calculates as "the cost of doing business"), the astreinte:

  • Compounds — each breach adds another penalty.
  • Accrues automatically — no need to file a fresh contempt motion per breach.
  • Liquidates on demand — the recipient parent applies for liquidation when the accumulated total is large enough to enforce.
  • Shifts incentives — the obstructing parent quickly faces an arithmetic problem they can't argue out of.

Practical template — request paragraph (BE example)

"Het Tribunal de la famille wordt verzocht, op grond van artikel 1385bis van het Gerechtelijk Wetboek, een dwangsom op te leggen van €250 (tweehonderdvijftig euro) per inbreuk op artikel [X] van het vonnis van [datum], met automatische accumulatie en zonder noodzaak van afzonderlijke procedure per inbreuk."

Translate / adapt to your local language and procedural norms.

What this is not

It's not punishment for past breaches (use ordinary contempt for that — see your jurisdiction's contempt mechanism). It's a forward-looking deterrent that makes future breaches arithmetically expensive.

Disclaimer. This is a starter template, not legal advice. Adapt to your jurisdiction and case facts. Have a licensed practitioner review before filing. Statutes and procedural rules vary and update — verify against primary source.

— AntiAlienate.com · CC BY 4.0

Sources & authoritative references

Topic baseline (independently verifiable):