A.E.O. v. T.K.O.

A.E.O. v. T.K.O.

On the evidence the claimant engaged in a long‑standing, repetitive pattern of psychological and emotional conduct (intimidation, harassment, stalking and breaches of orders) amounting to family violence; interim conduct orders had been breached and had not deterred the claimant; the risk of recurrence to the applicant, his spouse and their children was established; therefore protection orders under the FLA s.183 were necessary to protect at‑risk family members and to secure compliance, together with monetary penalties under s.228.

Citation
2018 BCSC 178
Parties
Claimant: A.E.O.; Respondent/applicant: T.K.O.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Family Law Protection Order / Final Judgment
Outcome
Protection orders granted against the claimant restraining contact with the applicant and other at-risk family members; monetary orders and costs awarded to the applicant.
Legal Topics
Protection Orders, Family Violence, Conduct Orders, Enforcement, Child Welfare
Source Language
English
Family Law Protection From Family Violence Protection Orders Family Violence Conduct Orders Enforcement Child Welfare

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A.E.O.

Claimant

T.K.O.

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Family Law Protection Order / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant breached interim conduct orders
  2. 2 Whether family violence is likely to occur
  3. 3 Whether protection orders should be made restraining the claimant's contact with the applicant and other at-risk family members

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence the claimant engaged in a long‑standing, repetitive pattern of psychological and emotional conduct (intimidation, harassment, stalking and breaches of orders) amounting to family violence; interim conduct orders had been breached and had not deterred the claimant; the risk of recurrence to the applicant, his spouse and their children was established; therefore protection orders under the FLA s.183 were necessary to protect at‑risk family members and to secure compliance, together with monetary penalties under s.228.

Court Disposition

Protection orders granted against the claimant restraining contact with the applicant and other at-risk family members; monetary orders and costs awarded to the applicant.

Orders

  • Claimant restrained from directly or indirectly communicating with or contacting the applicant except as permitted by prior orders; restrained from attending or entering places regularly attended by the applicant including residence, property, business, school or place of employment; at school or extracurricular...
  • Claimant restrained from directly or indirectly communicating with or contacting other at‑risk family members (Mrs. O., K.O., O.O. and J.L.); restrained from attending or entering places regularly attended by those at‑risk family members including residence, property, business, school or place of employment;...