R.A.B. v. T.L.B.

R.A.B. v. T.L.B.

Master concluded that limited variation of the interim without prejudice parenting order to implement key, non-disputed recommendations of the s.211 report was in the children's best interests, and that a parenting coordinator should be appointed for a minimum term (18 months) with statutory-limited authority to make minor schedule adjustments but not to make decisions regarding therapeutic regimes; accordingly the interim order was varied in part and a parenting coordinator appointed, with parties sharing costs and each bearing their own costs of the application.

Citation
2022 BCSC 2244
Parties
Claimant: R.A.B.; Respondent: T.L.B.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Family Law Parenting/custody Dispute / Interim Without Prejudice Variation Application
Outcome
Application granted in part: interim parenting order varied as to schedule; parenting coordinator appointed with limited authority; parties to share parenting coordinator costs; parties each bear their own costs of this application.
Legal Topics
Variation of Interim Order, Parenting Schedule, Appointment and Scope of Parenting Coordinator, Section 211 Report, Best Interests of the Child, Change in Circumstances
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Custody Parenting Coordination Interim Orders Divorce Act Family Law Act Variation of Interim Order Parenting Schedule +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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.A.B.

Claimant

T.L.B.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Parenting/custody Dispute / Interim Without Prejudice Variation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim without prejudice parenting order may be varied to implement a s.211 report
  2. 2 Whether the proposed parenting schedule is in the best interests of the child
  3. 3 Whether a parenting coordinator should be appointed and the appropriate scope of their authority

Ratio Decidendi

Master concluded that limited variation of the interim without prejudice parenting order to implement key, non-disputed recommendations of the s.211 report was in the children's best interests, and that a parenting coordinator should be appointed for a minimum term (18 months) with statutory-limited authority to make minor schedule adjustments but not to make decisions regarding therapeutic regimes; accordingly the interim order was varied in part and a parenting coordinator appointed, with parties sharing costs and each bearing their own costs of the application.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part: interim parenting order varied as to schedule; parenting coordinator appointed with limited authority; parties to share parenting coordinator costs; parties each bear their own costs of this application.

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of the Order of June 14, 2021 varied effective immediately to adopt a modified schedule based on Dr. Snell's s.211 recommendations
  • School year: claimant to have six consecutive days of parenting time starting Tuesday after school to Monday morning school drop-off; respondent to have eight consecutive days from Monday after school to Tuesday morning drop-off; holiday exchange times specified and exchanges at 4:00 p.m. if holiday