D.R.S. v. D.A.S.

D.R.S. v. D.A.S.

The court excluded the late-filed affidavit as its admission would not prevent a substantial injustice and it contained matters predating permissible response time; the court granted a conduct/protection order under ss.222 and 227(c) of the Family Law Act and the court's parens patriae jurisdiction restraining A.S. from any direct or indirect contact or communication with D.A.S. and the young person effective February 2, 2024, and ordered costs payable by A.S. to D.A.S. on assessment; the application alleging waiver of solicitor-client privilege was dismissed without prejudice for lack of evidentiary basis to find waiver.

Citation
2024 BCSC 1363
Parties
Claimant: D.R.S.; Claimant: A.S.; Respondent: D.A.S.; Respondent: R.D.C.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Protection Order and Privilege Application / Application Hearing (interim Orders)
Outcome
Late affidavit excluded; conduct/protection order granted restraining A.S. from any contact with D.A.S. and the young person; privilege application dismissed without prejudice; costs awarded to D.A.S. on assessment
Legal Topics
Protection Order, Conduct Order, Waiver of Privilege, Admissibility of Affidavits, Costs, Family Violence
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Protection Solicitor Client Privilege Parens Patriae Jurisdiction Protection Order Conduct Order Waiver of Privilege Admissibility of Affidavits +2 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 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.R.S.

Claimant

A.S.

Claimant

D.A.S.

Respondent

R.D.C.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Protection Order and Privilege Application / Application Hearing (interim Orders)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of a late-filed affidavit under Supreme Court Family Rules Rule 10-6(13)
  2. 2 Whether a protection/conduct order could be made against a non-family-member (grandmother) under the Family Law Act or parens patriae jurisdiction to protect a child
  3. 3 Whether solicitor-client privilege was waived and required disclosure of counsel's file and communications

Ratio Decidendi

The court excluded the late-filed affidavit as its admission would not prevent a substantial injustice and it contained matters predating permissible response time; the court granted a conduct/protection order under ss.222 and 227(c) of the Family Law Act and the court's parens patriae jurisdiction restraining A.S. from any direct or indirect contact or communication with D.A.S. and the young person effective February 2, 2024, and ordered costs payable by A.S. to D.A.S. on assessment; the application alleging waiver of solicitor-client privilege was dismissed without prejudice for lack of evidentiary basis to find waiver.

Court Disposition

Late affidavit excluded; conduct/protection order granted restraining A.S. from any contact with D.A.S. and the young person; privilege application dismissed without prejudice; costs awarded to D.A.S. on assessment

Orders

  • Affidavit filed February 1, 2024 by D.A.S. is excluded and not admitted into evidence
  • Conduct order (protection order effect) granted pursuant to ss.222 and 227(c) of the Family Law Act and the parens patriae jurisdiction: A.S. shall have no direct or indirect contact or communication, by any means, with D.A.S. or the young person, effective February 2, 2024