Esheria Canada Case Law
Sign in
Canada Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Canada Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
4 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Canada case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Canada decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family law 2026 NSSC 123

AL v. MW

Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

On balance of probabilities the court found AL credible and MW's allegations of sexual abuse and coercive control unproven; the child's best interests support shared parenting under AL's proposed eight‑day rotation with specific modifications; prospective child support set by shared‑custody set‑off to $475/month from April 1, 2026 and prospective s.7 expenses apportioned 63% AL/37% MW; retroactive table child support for Sep 2021–Aug 2022 was declined due to demonstrated burdens AL incurred to exercise parenting time, but AL was ordered to pay $31,536 by periodic payments of $350/month in add…

Source excerpt

  • Parenting arrangements
  • Best interests of the child
  • Retroactive child support
  • Section 7 special expenses
  • Coercive control
  • Alleged sexual assault
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 760

M.A.L. v. V.G.A.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

On credibility and best interests grounds the mother's evidence was preferred, the father was found not fully credible and responsible for escalatory conduct including a family violence incident (June 17, 2022); joint guardianship retained but the mother granted final decision-making for education and health; parenting time ordered on a 14-day rotation giving mother 9 nights and father 5 nights (approx 60/40) with specified summer and holiday arrangements; respondent's property and disclosure claims regarding Indian land and bank/mutual funds were dismissed for lack of reliable evidence; resp…

Source excerpt

  • Parenting time
  • Guardianship
  • Decision-making authority
  • Section 7 expenses
  • Family violence
  • Conduct orders
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 657

R.S.G. v. H.K.M.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

On a balance of s.37 factors and considering the Finlay report (admissible but to be weighed), a gradual interim increase in father's parenting time to Thursday 9:30 a.m. to Saturday 6:00 p.m. (effective May 7, 2026) is in the children's best interests because both parents are capable, the children have strong relationships with both families, the increase mitigates prior imbalance and is gradual to preserve stability.

Source excerpt

  • Parenting time
  • Best interests of the child
  • Interim variation under family law act
  • Section 211 assessor report admissibility
  • Family violence allegations
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 645

Chau v. Tsang

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

Child was habitually resident in Hong Kong from birth until removal on December 25, 2025; Mr. Chau was exercising custody rights at removal; the removal was therefore wrongful under Articles 3 and 12 of the Hague Convention; Ms. Tsang failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that return would expose Jay to a grave risk of physical or psychological harm under Article 13(b) or would offend fundamental principles under Article 20; accordingly, pursuant to Article 12 the court ordered Jay's immediate return to Hong Kong and set aside the BC protection and non-removal orders; a police enfor…

Source excerpt

  • Wrongful removal
  • Habitual residence
  • Article 13(b) grave risk exception
  • Article 20 human rights exception
  • Protection order
  • Non-removal order
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 590

M.B. v. K.V.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

Permission to relocate was refused because, after applying the statutory best-interests factors, the court concluded that risks from loss of Canadian government benefits and medical coverage, limited durable family support in South Africa, and likely permanent damage to the father-child relationship outweighed factors favouring relocation (mother's need and child's expressed preference); however, there was a sufficient change in circumstances to vary child support and ancillary provisions related to dividend distribution, tax transparency, special expenses and property sale, with incomes fixe…

Source excerpt

  • Best interests of the child
  • Relocation under the divorce act
  • Change in circumstances
  • Special (s.7) expenses
  • Dividend income characterization
  • Retroactive child support
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 NSSC 70

Power v. Power

Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

On the evidence, focusing solely on J's best interests, the court found that Mr. Power's pattern of coercive and undermining conduct had harmed J's relationship with his mother and that Ms. Power proved that relocation to Colby Village and a change to primary care with the mother having final decision-making over sporting activities were in J's best interests; accordingly relocation was permitted effective immediately and the parenting schedule was modified with an initial reduced-contact transition period for the father.

Source excerpt

  • Parenting
  • Custody
  • Relocation
  • Shared parenting
  • Decision-making authority
  • Best interests of the child
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 500

J. W. P. v. J. R.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

Because the sole test is the child's best interests and the evidence established that the Child has been enrolled and attended kindergarten in Langley only when with the claimant, the respondent failed to demonstrate she made required 'best efforts' to relocate to Langley as contemplated by the 2025 Consent Order, and the respondent's unilateral relocation to Cultus Lake would materially impair shared parenting and educational stability, the court ordered the Child attend school in Langley for grade one and set a conditional, modified parenting schedule effective August 1, 2026 unless the res…

Source excerpt

  • Parenting time
  • Schooling placement
  • Best interests of the child
  • Consent order enforcement
  • Relocation efforts
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 414

Kane v. Kane

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court fixed the date of alleged wrongful retention as November 5, 2025; applying the Balev/Ludwig hybrid approach and Article 31's territorial‑unit focus, the court found the focal point of the children's lives immediately before that date was Nanaimo, British Columbia, and therefore there was no wrongful retention under the Hague Convention; alternatively, even if the children were habitually resident in the United States, the petitioner had acquiesced to their remaining in British Columbia and return would be refused under Article 13.

Source excerpt

  • Habitual residence
  • Wrongful retention
  • Article 31 territorial unit analysis
  • Article 13 acquiescence/grave risk exception
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCCA 99

Glassen v. Glassen

Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal

Appeal dismissed because the trial judge's factual findings and discretionary property and parenting orders were supported by evidence and correct application of law; discretionary decisions were entitled to deference; statutory constraints on departing from equal division were properly applied; the dog award complied with s.97(4.2); and the proposed additional evidence failed the Palmer test and would not have altered the result.

Source excerpt

  • Division of family property
  • Parenting decision-making authority
  • Admission of fresh evidence on appeal
  • Standard of appellate review
  • Family law act provisions on companion animals
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 NSCA 22

Rice v. Rice

Court
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

The Court dismissed the appeal and denied the motion for fresh evidence because the proposed evidence failed the Palmer criteria (lack of due diligence, irrelevance, inadmissibility and inability to affect the outcome); the hearing judge correctly applied s.16(3) of the Divorce Act, her factual findings were supported by the record, and no reviewable error was shown to displace the high appellate deference owed in custody decisions.

Source excerpt

  • Best interests of the child
  • Fresh evidence (palmer test)
  • Affidavit admissibility and hearsay
  • Exhibit books and document proof
  • Parenting time and decision‑making authority
  • Withholding of children
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Canada decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.