M.P. v. P.P.

M.P. v. P.P.

Applying the Family Law Act and Divorce Act to the accepted objective evidence the court found the parties began living in a marriage-like relationship on May 1, 2017 and that it continued uninterrupted until March 21, 2022; the factual record did not establish a present likelihood of family violence so no protection order issued; relocation to Nevada was not in the children's best interests and was denied; the existing 2-2-5-5 shared parenting schedule was continued with specified decision-making allocations (limited final authority to mother for counseling for one year and daycare decisions until school; shared otherwise); passports divided (mother holds U.S. passports, father holds...

Citation
2024 BCSC 2138
Parties
Claimant: M.P.; Respondent: P.P.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Divorce, Custody, Property and Support / Trial Judgment (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Judgment: marriage-like relationship found to begin May 1, 2017 and continue until March 21, 2022; protection order dismissed; relocation application denied; shared parenting (2-2-5-5) ordered; passports split (U.S. passports to mother; Canadian passports to father); equal division of family property ordered with...
Legal Topics
Relocation, Parenting Time and Decision Making, Income Imputation, Family Violence, Equalization of Family Property, Promissory Notes, Passports and Travel Consent, Daycare and Exchanges, CEBA Loans
Source Language
English
Family Law Divorce Child Custody and Parenting Property Division Spousal Support Child Support Protection Orders Relocation +8 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 7 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.P.

Claimant

P.P.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Divorce, Custody, Property and Support / Trial Judgment (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When did the marriage-like relationship begin and its duration for FLA purposes
  2. 2 Whether family violence is likely and whether a protection order should issue
  3. 3 Whether relocation to Nevada is in the children's best interests

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the Family Law Act and Divorce Act to the accepted objective evidence the court found the parties began living in a marriage-like relationship on May 1, 2017 and that it continued uninterrupted until March 21, 2022; the factual record did not establish a present likelihood of family violence so no protection order issued; relocation to Nevada was not in the children's best interests and was denied; the existing 2-2-5-5 shared parenting schedule was continued with specified decision-making allocations (limited final authority to mother for counseling for one year and daycare decisions until school; shared otherwise); passports divided (mother holds U.S. passports, father holds...

Court Disposition

Judgment: marriage-like relationship found to begin May 1, 2017 and continue until March 21, 2022; protection order dismissed; relocation application denied; shared parenting (2-2-5-5) ordered; passports split (U.S. passports to mother; Canadian passports to father); equal division of family property ordered with...

Orders

  • Marriage-like relationship found to begin May 1, 2017 and to have continued until March 21, 2022
  • Protection order under FLA s.183 dismissed