DeLaurier v. Jackson

DeLaurier v. Jackson

Equity and the paramount welfare principle allow courts to override a father's statutory/common‑law authority over a child's religious upbringing when, on all the facts—including the child's long residence with foster parents, settled religious identification, and expressed wishes—the child's material, moral, emotional and intellectual welfare requires that parental rights be suspended; the lower courts properly exercised their discretion and their orders should not be disturbed.

Citation
[1934] SCR 149
Parties
Appellant (mother): Marie DeLaurier; Appellant (father): Joseph DeLaurier; Respondent (foster Mother): Lila Jackson; Respondent (foster Father): Frederick G. Jackson
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 January 1934
Procedural Posture
Family Law — Custody/habeas Corpus / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario (motions and Trials Before Mc Evoy J. and Kerwin J.)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; orders below affirmed.
Legal Topics
Infant Custody, Parental Rights, Religious Upbringing, Welfare of the Child, Discretionary Equitable Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Family Law Equity Child Welfare Religious Education Infant Custody Parental Rights Religious Upbringing Welfare 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marie DeLaurier

Appellant (mother)

Joseph DeLaurier

Appellant (father)

Lila Jackson

Respondent (foster Mother)

Frederick G. Jackson

Respondent (foster Father)

Procedural Posture

Family Law — Custody/habeas Corpus / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario (motions and Trials Before Mc Evoy J. and Kerwin J.)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the father’s statutory/common‑law authority over the child’s religious education (Infants Act s.24) can be overridden
  2. 2 Whether equity (Judicature Act) permits suspension of parental rights when child’s welfare requires it
  3. 3 Whether trial judge’s discretionary custody decision should be disturbed given child’s long residence with foster parents and settled religious identification

Ratio Decidendi

Equity and the paramount welfare principle allow courts to override a father's statutory/common‑law authority over a child's religious upbringing when, on all the facts—including the child's long residence with foster parents, settled religious identification, and expressed wishes—the child's material, moral, emotional and intellectual welfare requires that parental rights be suspended; the lower courts properly exercised their discretion and their orders should not be disturbed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; orders below affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Orders of McEvoy J. (Sept 4, 1929) and Kerwin J. (Jan 13, 1933) dismissing application for habeas corpus and custody affirmed.