L.E.S. v. M.J.S.

L.E.S. v. M.J.S.

Supervised access must continue pending judicial review in November 2014 because the evidence does not establish that supervision can be safely removed: supervised visits to date have been positive but concerns remain about past allegations and unresolved mental health issues and there were no defined goals or documented progress to warrant removal; therefore supervision is continued with specific, time‑limited, reduced‑level terms, mandatory medical reporting and scheduled focused reviews.

Citation
2014 NSSC 34
Parties
Applicant: L.E.S.; Respondent: M.J.S.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Family Law Parenting/access Under the Maintenance and Custody Act / Review Hearing (first Merits Review of Supervised Access)
Outcome
Supervised access continued with detailed, time‑limited modifications and monitoring; matter set for further review in November 2014
Legal Topics
Supervised Access, Best Interests of the Child, Review/variation of Orders, Parental Capacity and Fitness, Psychological Assessment, Child Protection/allegations
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Welfare Access and Custody Mental Health Supervised Access Best Interests of the Child Review/variation of Orders Parental Capacity and Fitness +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L.E.S.

Applicant

M.J.S.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Parenting/access Under the Maintenance and Custody Act / Review Hearing (first Merits Review of Supervised Access)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether supervised access for Mr. S should continue or be removed
  2. 2 Whether supervised access can be reduced in level or occur in the community
  3. 3 What evidentiary showing is required at a review hearing and the scope of review

Ratio Decidendi

Supervised access must continue pending judicial review in November 2014 because the evidence does not establish that supervision can be safely removed: supervised visits to date have been positive but concerns remain about past allegations and unresolved mental health issues and there were no defined goals or documented progress to warrant removal; therefore supervision is continued with specific, time‑limited, reduced‑level terms, mandatory medical reporting and scheduled focused reviews.

Court Disposition

Supervised access continued with detailed, time‑limited modifications and monitoring; matter set for further review in November 2014

Orders

  • Supervised access continued at Veith House until the November 2014 review
  • One-on-one supervised visits at Veith House: ninety minutes each, one visit per month with each of the two younger children (R and K), not to be pre-empted