N.L.B. v. C.E.B.

N.L.B. v. C.E.B.

Children to remain in father's care in Vancouver because stability and educational continuity outweighed the respondent's proposal to relocate to Alberta; both parents acted in good faith but respondent's circumstances (mental health, ongoing connection to abusive partner, financial instability, history of abrupt removal) and the risk of further disruptive moves made Vancouver retention and primary care by father in childrens' best interests; respondent granted structured parenting time in Alberta with enforcement measures and restrictions; prior parenting and child support orders adjusted accordingly.

Citation
2017 BCSC 1463
Parties
Petitioner/claimant (father): N.L.B.; Respondent (mother): C.E.B.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Family Law Relocation/guardianship/parenting/child Support / Trial (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Children to remain in father's primary care in Vancouver; respondent granted defined parenting time exercised in Alberta with initial specified unsupervised visits and ongoing telephone/holiday schedule; prior January 7, 2016 parenting order set aside retroactive to February 22, 2017; Child Support Order set aside...
Legal Topics
Relocation Application, Best Interests of the Child, Parenting Time and Supervision, Jurisdiction and Habitual Residence, Family Violence, Variation of Consent Orders, Costs
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Custody Relocation Child Support Guardianship Relocation Application Best Interests of the Child Parenting Time and Supervision +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

N.L.B.

Petitioner/claimant (father)

C.E.B.

Respondent (mother)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Relocation/guardianship/parenting/child Support / Trial (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent consented to move the children to Vancouver
  2. 2 Which parent is effectively applying for relocation
  3. 3 Whether proposed relocations are made in good faith under s.69 FLA

Ratio Decidendi

Children to remain in father's care in Vancouver because stability and educational continuity outweighed the respondent's proposal to relocate to Alberta; both parents acted in good faith but respondent's circumstances (mental health, ongoing connection to abusive partner, financial instability, history of abrupt removal) and the risk of further disruptive moves made Vancouver retention and primary care by father in childrens' best interests; respondent granted structured parenting time in Alberta with enforcement measures and restrictions; prior parenting and child support orders adjusted accordingly.

Court Disposition

Children to remain in father's primary care in Vancouver; respondent granted defined parenting time exercised in Alberta with initial specified unsupervised visits and ongoing telephone/holiday schedule; prior January 7, 2016 parenting order set aside retroactive to February 22, 2017; Child Support Order set aside...

Orders

  • Children to remain in father's care in Vancouver; primary residence awarded to father
  • Parenting time for respondent: two initial unsupervised in‑person visits (weekend of Sept 22–24, 2017 and Nov 10–13, 2017) in Stony Plain with claimant paying transportation for those visits; if successful, Christmas break divided equally and respondent to exercise parenting time in Alberta for spring break/Easter...