K.H.D. v. O.O.M.

Parties

Procedural Posture

Family Law – Divorce, Parenting, Relocation, Property and Support / Applications Hearing (jurisdictional and Interim Applications), Pre Trial (5 Day Hearing July 8 11, 2024)

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court of British Columbia should decline jurisdiction over parenting and support matters in favour of the Florida District Court
2. 2 Whether the Florida District Court has territorial and subject-matter competence to decide parenting, relocation and related support matters
3. 3 Whether the children are habitually resident in Florida under s.6.3 of the Divorce Act and the consequences of that finding

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the children are habitually resident in Florida and, under s.6.3 of the Divorce Act and applicable CJPTA factors, the Florida District Court has territorial and subject-matter competence and is the more appropriate forum to determine all parenting, relocation and first-instance child and spousal support issues; accordingly BC declines to exercise jurisdiction over those matters but retains jurisdiction over family property and family debt under the Family Law Act; the court ordered interim equal distributions from the trust proceeds and required updated financial disclosure and allocated costs as stated.

Court Disposition

BC court declines to exercise jurisdiction over parenting, relocation and first-instance child and spousal support matters (Florida is more appropriate forum); BC retains jurisdiction over family property and family debt; interim financial and disclosure orders and costs orders as specified.

Orders

• The children of the marriage are declared habitually resident in Florida.
• The District Court of Florida has jurisdiction to determine all parenting issues between the parties, including any motion by the Mother to relocate the children to BC.