A.D.B. v. T.A.B.

A.D.B. v. T.A.B.

On the evidence admissible and considered at summary trial, the best interests of the children were met by authorizing the plaintiff to relocate with the children to Calgary; the plaintiff remains the primary caregiver and primary resident parent; joint guardianship and joint custody continue with the Joyce model definition added; the defendant's access schedule largely stands but he must notify by 8 p.m. on the Monday of an access week whether he will exercise mid-week or weekend access; no s.15 report was required; plaintiff entitled to costs on Scale B.

Citation
2010 BCSC 1117
Parties
Plaintiff: A.D.B.; Defendant: T.A.B.; Defendant: the T.A.B. Family Trust; Defendant: T.A.B., Trustee of the T.A.B. Family Trust; Defendant: A.L.B., Trustee of the T.A.B. Family Trust; Defendant: C.L.G., also known as C.L.B., Trustee of the T.A.B. Family Trust
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Mobility / Summary Trial (rule 18 A)
Outcome
Plaintiff's relocation to Calgary authorized; primary residence remains with plaintiff; joint guardianship and joint custody continue with Joyce model added; access schedule largely maintained with a notification requirement; costs awarded to plaintiff on Scale B.
Legal Topics
Relocation, Primary Residence, Guardianship, Access Schedule, Best Interests of the Child, Joyce Model
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Custody and Access Mobility/relocation Relocation Primary Residence Guardianship Access Schedule Best Interests of the Child +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A.D.B.

Plaintiff

T.A.B.

Defendant

the T.A.B. Family Trust

Defendant

T.A.B., Trustee of the T.A.B. Family Trust

Defendant

A.L.B., Trustee of the T.A.B. Family Trust

Defendant

C.L.G., also known as C.L.B., Trustee of the T.A.B. Family Trust

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Mobility / Summary Trial (rule 18 A)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the matter was suitable for summary disposition under Rule 18A
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff should be authorized to relocate with the children to Calgary
  3. 3 Whether the defendant should be designated primary caregiver and primary resident parent

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence admissible and considered at summary trial, the best interests of the children were met by authorizing the plaintiff to relocate with the children to Calgary; the plaintiff remains the primary caregiver and primary resident parent; joint guardianship and joint custody continue with the Joyce model definition added; the defendant's access schedule largely stands but he must notify by 8 p.m. on the Monday of an access week whether he will exercise mid-week or weekend access; no s.15 report was required; plaintiff entitled to costs on Scale B.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's relocation to Calgary authorized; primary residence remains with plaintiff; joint guardianship and joint custody continue with Joyce model added; access schedule largely maintained with a notification requirement; costs awarded to plaintiff on Scale B.

Orders

  • Plaintiff authorized to relocate with the parties' two children from Kelowna, British Columbia to Calgary, Alberta.
  • Children's primary residence remains with the plaintiff; the plaintiff is the primary caregiver.