C.K.N. v. A.M.N.

C.K.N. v. A.M.N.

Relocation was denied because the relocation would be overly destabilizing for the children — particularly the older child with special needs — and would substantially impair the children’s relationship with the father and extended family; the asserted economic benefits to the mother were speculative and inadequately evidenced and did not outweigh the harms to the children’s stability and relationships.

Citation
2025 BCSC 2347
Parties
Claimant: C.K.N.; Respondent: A.M.N.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Family Law Relocation Under the Divorce Act / Application for Relocation Heard October 30, 2025; Judgment November 28, 2025
Outcome
Application dismissed; relocation prohibited
Legal Topics
Relocation, Best Interests of the Child, Parenting Time, Child With Special Needs, Financial Disclosure
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Custody and Access Divorce Act Applications Relocation Best Interests of the Child Parenting Time Child With Special Needs Financial Disclosure

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C.K.N.

Claimant

A.M.N.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Relocation Under the Divorce Act / Application for Relocation Heard October 30, 2025; Judgment November 28, 2025

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether relocation of the children from Kamloops to Fort St. John should be authorized under the Divorce Act
  2. 2 Whether the proposed economic benefits to the mother outweigh the destabilizing effects on the children
  3. 3 Impact of relocation on the father’s parenting time and the children’s relationships with extended family

Ratio Decidendi

Relocation was denied because the relocation would be overly destabilizing for the children — particularly the older child with special needs — and would substantially impair the children’s relationship with the father and extended family; the asserted economic benefits to the mother were speculative and inadequately evidenced and did not outweigh the harms to the children’s stability and relationships.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; relocation prohibited

Orders

  • Mother prohibited from relocating the children from Kamloops, British Columbia without written consent or further court order
  • Costs awarded to the father at Scale B