M.F.T.J. v. J.F.B.

M.F.T.J. v. J.F.B.

On the whole of the evidence the child's hearsay disclosures to two independent professionals and supervision reports are reliable and, together with corroborating behavioural indicators and the parties' credibility assessments, establish a real risk that sexual touching has occurred or may occur if unsupervised access is permitted; applying the Divorce Act best interests factors and blended analysis of parenting plus relocation, the court grants the respondent's application to relocate to Ontario, awards the respondent sole decision‑making responsibility and all parenting time, suspends the claimant's parenting time until further order contingent on a professional report, allocates...

Citation
2025 BCSC 1852
Parties
Claimant: M.F.T.J.; Respondent: J.F.B.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Divorce Act / Family Law Relocation and Parenting Proceeding / Trial and Judgment (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Respondent's application to relocate to Ontario granted; respondent awarded sole decision‑making responsibility and all parenting time; claimant granted no parenting time until further order; parties ordered to obtain and equally share cost of a qualified professional report before further parenting/time...
Legal Topics
Relocation, Parenting Orders, Best Interests of the Child, Hearsay and Child Disclosures, Supervised Visitation, Allegations of Sexual Abuse, Costs and Child Support
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Protection Evidence (hearsay) Relocation Law Child Custody and Access Relocation Parenting Orders Best Interests of the Child +4 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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.F.T.J.

Claimant

J.F.B.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Act / Family Law Relocation and Parenting Proceeding / Trial and Judgment (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent may relocate to Ontario with the child
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk that the child was sexually touched by the claimant or would be at risk if unsupervised contact granted
  3. 3 Admissibility and weight of the child's hearsay statements to professionals and family members

Ratio Decidendi

On the whole of the evidence the child's hearsay disclosures to two independent professionals and supervision reports are reliable and, together with corroborating behavioural indicators and the parties' credibility assessments, establish a real risk that sexual touching has occurred or may occur if unsupervised access is permitted; applying the Divorce Act best interests factors and blended analysis of parenting plus relocation, the court grants the respondent's application to relocate to Ontario, awards the respondent sole decision‑making responsibility and all parenting time, suspends the claimant's parenting time until further order contingent on a professional report, allocates...

Court Disposition

Respondent's application to relocate to Ontario granted; respondent awarded sole decision‑making responsibility and all parenting time; claimant granted no parenting time until further order; parties ordered to obtain and equally share cost of a qualified professional report before further parenting/time...

Orders

  • Relocation to Ontario authorized immediately for respondent and child
  • Respondent awarded all parenting time and all decision‑making responsibility for the child pursuant to Divorce Act ss.16.1 and 16.3