M.P. v. P.P.

M.P. v. P.P.

On an imperfect interim record the court refused to order supervised parenting or permit interim relocation to Nevada because the evidence did not establish a sufficient risk to the children or mother to justify exceptional restrictions and because interim relocation would materially impair the father-child...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2022 BCSC 1511
Parties
Claimant: M.P. (also known as M. H.-E.); Respondent: P.P.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Divorce/family Law – Interim Relocation/parenting/support Application / Interim Application (in Chambers)
Outcome
Interim relief granted in part and refused in part: no professional supervision ordered; relocation ordered set aside and children to return to Lower Mainland by October 1, 2022; interim parenting schedule established; child support and spousal support amounts varied; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Relocation, Supervised Parenting, Interim Support Orders, Best Interests of the Child, Income Imputation, Divorce Act Ss.16/16.9/16.92/16.93, Child Support Guidelines, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines
Source Language
english
Family Law Child Custody Relocation Child Support Spousal Support Domestic Violence Supervised Parenting Interim Support Orders +5 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.P. (also known as M. H.-E.)

Claimant

P.P.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce/family Law – Interim Relocation/parenting/support Application / Interim Application (in Chambers)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether supervised parenting of father is required
  2. 2 Whether interim relocation of children to Nevada should be permitted
  3. 3 Proper interim child support amount

Ratio Decidendi

On an imperfect interim record the court refused to order supervised parenting or permit interim relocation to Nevada because the evidence did not establish a sufficient risk to the children or mother to justify exceptional restrictions and because interim relocation would materially impair the father-child relationship; income was imputed to the father ($140,000) based on documentary indicators and informal unrecorded transactions, producing interim child support of $2,037/month and interim spousal support of $2,198/month; an interim graduated parenting schedule was ordered pending return of the children to the Lower Mainland and trial.

Court Disposition

Interim relief granted in part and refused in part: no professional supervision ordered; relocation ordered set aside and children to return to Lower Mainland by October 1, 2022; interim parenting schedule established; child support and spousal support amounts varied; costs reserved.

Orders

  • No professional supervision required for Mr. P's parenting time
  • Order of Master Keighley (May 20, 2022) authorizing relocation set aside; Ms. P to return children to a place of residence in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia by October 1, 2022