Difference between revisions of "Changing Family Law Orders and Agreements Involving Children"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
Line 19: Line 19:
===The ''Divorce Act''===
===The ''Divorce Act''===


Under s. 5 of the ''[[Divorce Act]]'', the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to vary a ''Divorce Act'' order for custody or access made anywhere in Canada as long as the person making the application, (the applicant), ordinarily lives in British Columbia when the application is made or if both spouses have agreed to have the application heard here. However, if the child has deeper roots and greater social ties in the other province or territory, the court is likely to <span class="noglossary">transfer</span> the matter to be heard in the other province or territory.
Under section 5 of the ''[[Divorce Act]]'', the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to vary a ''Divorce Act'' order for custody or access made anywhere in Canada as long as the person making the application, (the applicant), ordinarily lives in British Columbia when the application is made or if both spouses have agreed to have the application heard here. However, if the child has deeper roots and greater social ties in the other province or territory, the court is likely to <span class="noglossary">transfer</span> the matter to be heard in the other province or territory.


Section 17 gives the court the authority to hear and decide variation applications. Under this section, the court may vary, cancel, or suspend orders dealing with custody and access. Section 17 also sets out the test for the variation of custody and access orders, and the principle that it is in a child's best interests to have maximum contact with each parent. Section 17 says this:
Section 17 gives the court the authority to hear and decide variation applications. Under this section, the court may vary, cancel, or suspend orders dealing with custody and access. Section 17 also sets out the test for the variation of custody and access orders, and the principle that it is in a child's best interests to have maximum contact with each parent. Section 17 says this:
Line 40: Line 40:
<blockquote><tt>On application, a court may change, suspend or terminate an order respecting parenting arrangements if satisfied that, since the making of the order, there has been a change in the needs or circumstances of the child, including because of a change in the circumstances of another person.</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote><tt>On application, a court may change, suspend or terminate an order respecting parenting arrangements if satisfied that, since the making of the order, there has been a change in the needs or circumstances of the child, including because of a change in the circumstances of another person.</tt></blockquote>


The test to vary orders about contact is at s. 60, and says exactly the same thing, just with the word "contact" in place of the phrase "parenting arrangements".
The test to vary orders about contact is at section 60, and says exactly the same thing, just with the word "contact" in place of the phrase "parenting arrangements".


The general test under the ''[[Family Law Act]]'' to vary orders is at s. 215(1). It applies when there isn't a specific test required to vary a particular order, such as the way ss. 47 and 60 set out the required test to vary orders about parenting arrangements and contact. Since there's no specific test to vary orders for guardianship, the general test set out in s. 251(1) will apply:
The general test under the ''[[Family Law Act]]'' to vary orders is at section 215(1). It applies when there isn't a specific test required to vary a particular order, such as the way sections 47 and 60 set out the required test to vary orders about parenting arrangements and contact. Since there's no specific test to vary orders for guardianship, the general test set out in section 251(1) will apply:


<blockquote><tt>Subject to this Act, a court on application by a party may change, suspend or terminate an order, if there has been a change in circumstances since the order was made.</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote><tt>Subject to this Act, a court on application by a party may change, suspend or terminate an order, if there has been a change in circumstances since the order was made.</tt></blockquote>


Whenever the court is asked to make an order about guardianship, parenting arrangements, and contact, s. 37(1) requires the court to consider only the best interests of the child. The factors to be taken into <span class="noglossary">account</span> in considering the best interests of the child are set out at s. 37(2).
Whenever the court is asked to make an order about guardianship, parenting arrangements, and contact, section 37(1) requires the court to consider only the best interests of the child. The factors to be taken into <span class="noglossary">account</span> in considering the best interests of the child are set out at section 37(2).


In  [http://canlii.ca/t/gnftl ''Williamson v. Williamson''], 2016 BCCA 87, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the test to apply in an application to vary parenting time arrangements under the ''Family Law Act'' is the same test that applies to the variation of custody arrangements under the ''Divorce Act''. Under this test, a ''material change in circumstances'' is:
In  [http://canlii.ca/t/gnftl ''Williamson v. Williamson''], 2016 BCCA 87, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the test to apply in an application to vary parenting time arrangements under the ''Family Law Act'' is the same test that applies to the variation of custody arrangements under the ''Divorce Act''. Under this test, a ''material change in circumstances'' is:
Line 88: Line 88:
*The parent with the children's primary residence has repeatedly frustrated the other parent's access to the children.
*The parent with the children's primary residence has repeatedly frustrated the other parent's access to the children.
*The child has been apprehended by child protection workers.
*The child has been apprehended by child protection workers.
*The child has been abused by the parent with the children's primary residence.
*The child has been abused by the parent whom the child primarily lives with.
*A mature child has expressed a wish to live with the other parent.
*A mature child has expressed a wish to live with the other parent.


Line 97: Line 97:
The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' has rules about who is presumed to be a guardian. When someone is presumed to be a guardian, that person ''is'' a guardian, without the need for an order. The only people who must have an order making them a guardian are the people who don't fit into those presumptions, like aunts and uncles, grandparents, and other people who have established a caring relationship with a child.  
The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' has rules about who is presumed to be a guardian. When someone is presumed to be a guardian, that person ''is'' a guardian, without the need for an order. The only people who must have an order making them a guardian are the people who don't fit into those presumptions, like aunts and uncles, grandparents, and other people who have established a caring relationship with a child.  


People who are guardians, whether by a court order or as a result of the presumptions of guardianship, manage the care and raising of a child by exercising ''parental responsibilities''. Under s. 40(2) of the act, parental responsibilities are presumed to be shared by all guardians until an order or an agreement says otherwise, and s. 40(3) says:
People who are guardians, whether by a court order or as a result of the presumptions of guardianship, manage the care and raising of a child by exercising ''parental responsibilities''. Under section 40(2) of the act, parental responsibilities are presumed to be shared by all guardians until an order or an agreement says otherwise, and section 40(3) says:


<blockquote><tt>Parental responsibilities may be allocated under an agreement or order such that they may be exercised by</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote><tt>Parental responsibilities may be allocated under an agreement or order such that they may be exercised by</tt></blockquote>
Line 107: Line 107:
===Guardianship===
===Guardianship===


Under s. 51(1) of the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the court may make an order appointing someone as a guardian of a child or make an order ''terminating'' someone's guardianship of a child. This section doesn't say what the court should consider when terminating someone's guardianship. However, s.37 (1) says that:
Under section 51(1) of the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the court may make an order appointing someone as a guardian of a child or make an order ''terminating'' someone's guardianship of a child. This section doesn't say what the court should consider when terminating someone's guardianship. However, s.37 (1) says that:


<blockquote><tt>In making an agreement or order under this Part respecting guardianship, parenting arrangements or contact with a child, the parties and the court must consider the best interests of the child only.</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote><tt>In making an agreement or order under this Part respecting guardianship, parenting arrangements or contact with a child, the parties and the court must consider the best interests of the child only.</tt></blockquote>
Line 140: Line 140:
The case of ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1fr99 Gordon v. Goertz]'' also applies to changing access orders under the ''Divorce Act'': the applicant must show that there has been a serious change in circumstances that affects the child's best interests before a court will even consider the application and, once this hurdle is crossed, the court will look at all of the circumstances before making a decision about access as if the matter was being heard for the first time, with no presumption in favour of how things used to be.
The case of ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1fr99 Gordon v. Goertz]'' also applies to changing access orders under the ''Divorce Act'': the applicant must show that there has been a serious change in circumstances that affects the child's best interests before a court will even consider the application and, once this hurdle is crossed, the court will look at all of the circumstances before making a decision about access as if the matter was being heard for the first time, with no presumption in favour of how things used to be.


Under ss. 47 and 60 of the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the court may vary an order for parenting time or contact if it is satisfied that:
Under sections 47 and 60 of the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the court may vary an order for parenting time or contact if it is satisfied that:


<blockquote><tt>... since the making of the order, there has been a change in the needs or circumstances of the child, including because of a change in the circumstances of another person.</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote><tt>... since the making of the order, there has been a change in the needs or circumstances of the child, including because of a change in the circumstances of another person.</tt></blockquote>
Line 252: Line 252:
Where there is no court order or agreement with respect to parenting arrangements in place, section 46 of the ''Family Law Act'' applies. Here is how that process works:
Where there is no court order or agreement with respect to parenting arrangements in place, section 46 of the ''Family Law Act'' applies. Here is how that process works:


Before there is a change to a child’s residence that can reasonably be expected to have a significant impact on that child’s relationship with another guardian, the guardian seeking the change in residence must bring an application for an order respecting parenting time, pursuant to s. 45 of the ''Family Law Act''.
Changing a child's residence can significantly impact the child's relationship with another guardian. When the potential for impact is reasonable to expect, the person wanting to change the child's residence must apply to court under section 45 of the ''Family Law Act'' for an order respecting parenting time.


Section 46(2) of the ''Family Law Act'' sets out the test to determine whether there can be changes to a child’s residence: To determine the parenting arrangements that would be in the best interests of the child in the circumstances set out in subsection (1) of this section, the court
Section 46(2) of the ''Family Law Act'' sets out the test to determine whether there can be changes to a child’s residence:  


(a) must consider, in addition to the factors set out in section 37 (2) [best interests of child], the reasons for the change in the location of the child's residence, and
<blockquote><tt>To determine the parenting arrangements that would be in the best interests of the child in the circumstances set out in subsection (1) of this section, the court</tt></blockquote>


(b) must not consider whether the guardian who is planning to move would do so without the child.
<blockquote><blockquote><tt>(a) must consider, in addition to the factors set out in section 37 (2) ''[best interests of child]'', the reasons for the change in the location of the child's residence, and</tt></blockquote></blockquote>
 
<blockquote><blockquote><tt>(b) must not consider whether the guardian who is planning to move would do so without the child.</tt></blockquote></blockquote>


Where the parties have an existing order or agreement with respect to parenting arrangements, the ''Family Law Act'' sets out two new tests to determine whether a guardian will be permitted to relocate if another guardian objects.
Where the parties have an existing order or agreement with respect to parenting arrangements, the ''Family Law Act'' sets out two new tests to determine whether a guardian will be permitted to relocate if another guardian objects.
Line 264: Line 266:
Here's how that process works:.
Here's how that process works:.


First, under s. 66, a guardian who plans a move, with or without the child, that will have a significant impact on the child's relationship with a guardian or other people with a significant role in the child's life must give written notice of the proposed move at least 60 days before the move, to all other ''guardians'' and ''persons with contact'' with the child. (The guardian who is moving can apply to court for an exception to this requirement.) The notice must state the place the guardian plans on moving to and the date of the move. This requirement applies whether a guardian is planning on moving with a child or by themselves.
First, under section 66, a guardian who plans a move, with or without the child, that will have a significant impact on the child's relationship with a guardian or other people with a significant role in the child's life must give written notice of the proposed move at least 60 days before the move, to all other ''guardians'' and ''persons with contact'' with the child. (The guardian who is moving can apply to court for an exception to this requirement.) The notice must state the place the guardian plans on moving to and the date of the move. This requirement applies whether a guardian is planning on moving with a child or by themselves.


Second, under s. 68, a guardian who objects to the proposed move must file an application in court to stop the move within 30 days of getting written notice of the move. The parties are required to try to resolve any disagreement about the move on their own, but this doesn't prevent a guardian from applying to stop the move. Only guardians can object; people with contact cannot. However, people with contact can make an application under section 59 of the ''Family Law Act'' or section 60 of the ''Family Law Act'' to seek an order or to change an existing order for contact, for the purpose of maintaining the relationship between the child and a person having contact with the child if the relocation occurs.
Second, under section 68, a guardian who objects to the proposed move must file an application in court to stop the move within 30 days of getting written notice of the move. The parties are required to try to resolve any disagreement about the move on their own, but this doesn't prevent a guardian from applying to stop the move. Only guardians can object; people with contact cannot. However, people with contact can make an application under section 59 of the ''Family Law Act'' or section 60 of the ''Family Law Act'' to seek an order or to change an existing order for contact, for the purpose of maintaining the relationship between the child and a person having contact with the child if the relocation occurs.


Third, if the parties can't resolve their differences about the move, then either guardian can apply to court for orders allowing or preventing the proposed move. There are different tests that the court will apply depending on whether the guardians have "substantially equal parenting time." The ''moving guardian'' must prove, under s. 69(4) that:
Third, if the parties can't resolve their differences about the move, then either guardian can apply to court for orders allowing or preventing the proposed move. There are different tests that the court will apply depending on whether the guardians have "substantially equal parenting time." The ''moving guardian'' must prove, under section 69(4) that:


*they have proposed to move ''in good faith,'' and
*they have proposed to move ''in good faith,'' and
Line 275: Line 277:
If the guardian who is moving can do this, the move is presumed to be in the child's best interests unless the guardian who is objecting to the move can convince the court otherwise.  
If the guardian who is moving can do this, the move is presumed to be in the child's best interests unless the guardian who is objecting to the move can convince the court otherwise.  


The test is a bit different if the moving guardian and the objecting guardian share the child's time equally or almost equally. In that <span class="noglossary">case</span>, the moving guardian must prove, under s. 69(5) that:
The test is a bit different if the moving guardian and the objecting guardian share the child's time equally or almost equally. In that <span class="noglossary">case</span>, the moving guardian must prove, under section 69(5) that:


*they have proposed to move "in good faith,"  
*they have proposed to move "in good faith,"  
Line 281: Line 283:
*the move is in the child's best interests.
*the move is in the child's best interests.


The meaning of ''good faith'' is discussed at s. 69(6):
The meaning of ''good faith'' is discussed at section 69(6):


<blockquote><tt>For the purposes of determining if the proposed relocation is made in good faith, the court must consider all relevant factors, including the following:</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote><tt>For the purposes of determining if the proposed relocation is made in good faith, the court must consider all relevant factors, including the following:</tt></blockquote>
Line 289: Line 291:
<blockquote><blockquote><tt>(d) any restrictions on relocation contained in a written agreement or an order.</tt></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote><blockquote><tt>(d) any restrictions on relocation contained in a written agreement or an order.</tt></blockquote></blockquote>


If the move is allowed, the objecting guardian may ask the court to vary the old arrangements for parenting time and, under s. 70(2), the court is required to "seek to preserve, to a reasonable extent, parenting arrangements under the original agreement or order."
If the move is allowed, the objecting guardian may ask the court to vary the old arrangements for parenting time and, under section 70(2), the court is required to "seek to preserve, to a reasonable extent, parenting arrangements under the original agreement or order."


==Resources and links==
==Resources and links==

Navigation menu