Harrison v. MacKinnon

Harrison v. MacKinnon

The move of the child to live with the father's partner constituted a material change that improved the father's ability to meet the child's needs, but the change did not justify replacing the 2006 shared‑parenting weekly alternation because the child's best interests require continued substantial time with both...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2010 NSSC 445
Parties
Petitioner: Kristen Harrison; Respondent: Michael MacKinnon
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Application to Vary Parenting Order Under the Maintenance and Custody Act / Variation Hearing; Oral Decision (final Order)
Outcome
Application to vary parenting order granted in part and dismissed in part; 2006 shared parenting order largely maintained with limited modifications.
Legal Topics
Variation of Parenting Order, Best Interests of the Child, Material Change in Circumstances, Child's Wishes, Shared Parenting
Source Language
english
Family Law Child Custody Variation of Parenting Order Best Interests of the Child Material Change in Circumstances Child's Wishes Shared Parenting

Source-derived case record

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kristen Harrison

Petitioner

Michael MacKinnon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Vary Parenting Order Under the Maintenance and Custody Act / Variation Hearing; Oral Decision (final Order)

  1. 1 Whether there has been a material change in circumstances since the 2006 shared parenting order
  2. 2 Whether the material change warrants transferring primary care to the mother
  3. 3 What weight to give to the child's wishes and maturity

Ratio Decidendi

The move of the child to live with the father's partner constituted a material change that improved the father's ability to meet the child's needs, but the change did not justify replacing the 2006 shared‑parenting weekly alternation because the child's best interests require continued substantial time with both parents; the child's wishes were given limited weight due to immaturity. Therefore the variation is limited to a framework permitting limited additional agreed overnight time with the unscheduled parent (no more than three times per month) while retaining the alternate‑weeks arrangement.

Court Disposition

Application to vary parenting order granted in part and dismissed in part; 2006 shared parenting order largely maintained with limited modifications.

Orders

  • 2006 weekly alternation parenting arrangement is reinstated as the primary order
  • The interim order requiring unrestricted accommodation of the child's additional time is replaced with a framework: by agreement of both parents, and in consultation with both parents, the child may spend additional time with the unscheduled parent overnight prior to a non‑school day until 7:00 p.m. on that...