Canada Case Law

XD v. SZ

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Applicant proved a material change in circumstances (contempt and disruption of mother–child relationship) and, after weighing PSA s.18(6) factors and s.18H relocation factors, the court found the factors overwhelmingly favoured the Applicant; therefore the Final order was varied to grant primary care and decision-making to the Applicant and to authorize relocation to Ontario with a specified parenting time regime for the Respondent and travel and enforcement safeguards.

Source excerpt

• Variation of parenting order
• Best interests of the child
• Relocation/mobility
• Parenting time and schedule
• Contempt and enforcement
• Preservation order

Read case analysis

Evans v. Evans

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court partially granted a support variation application, ordering child support recalculation from January 1, 2020, confirming J remained a child of the marriage through 2019, and leaving spousal support for later disclosure.

• Child support variation
• Spousal support review
• Retroactive variation
• Child of the marriage declaration
• Income determination and imputation
• Treatment of rrsp withdrawals and signing bonuses

Read case analysis

M.Y.T.C. v. L.H.N.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted a divorce, dismissed the respondent’s abuse of process applications, declined parenting orders for the estranged child, and divided family property with support orders.

• Division of family property
• Excluded property (gifts and trusts)
• Parental alienation
• Child support calculation
• Spousal support (lump sum and interim)
• Asset preservation and freezing orders

Read case analysis

Campbell v. Campbell

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the respondent was substantially successful in this family law costs hearing, with costs to follow the event but payment stayed pending compliance.

• Mobility
• Best interests of the child
• Costs awards
• Spousal support
• Child support
• Family violence

Read case analysis

D.D. v. H.D.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is allowed and the Orders under Appeal are set aside because the motion judge decided custody on an inadequate, one-sided evidentiary basis, denied procedural fairness, improperly delegated a judicial access determination to the respondent, and made unsupported support and imputed income findings; the Motion to Vary is to be reheard before a different judge and the respondent's child support obligations under the Consent Order are suspended pending further order.

Source excerpt

• Custody and access
• Best interests of the child
• Jurisdiction between federal and provincial statutes
• Contempt and enforcement
• Child and spousal support
• Imputation of income

Read case analysis