In Anderson v Anderson, 2023 SCC 13  [Anderson], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) clarified the approach to considering non-presumptively enforceable domestic contracts. In partially departing from the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, the Court unanimously ruled that while the overarching principles established in Miglin v Miglin, 2003 SCC 24 [Miglin], can be used in the interpretation of informal domestic contracts, any such interpretation must be directed by the objectives and structures of the underlying statute.   Facts Diana Anderson (“D”) and James Allan Anderson (“J”) were mar ..read more

In F v N (2022 SCC 51), the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) decided the question of whether or not Canadian courts have jurisdiction over custody issues involving children in situations of parental abduction. At issue were provisions of the Children’s Law Reform Act (“CLRA”) that sought to create a regime to address such concerns with the application of the ‘best interests of the child’ principle.    Background In this case,  F, the mother, and N, the father, are  parents to two young children. F and the children are  Canadian citizens. The family habitually resided&nb ..read more

Should conversations that take place during family mediation remain confidential? In Association de médiation familiale du Quebec v. Bouvier, 2021 SCC 54 [Association de mediation] the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC” or “the Court”) held that the exception to the general rule of settlement privilege can apply in the context of family mediation.  An exception to settlement privilege may be made out where “a defendant . . . show[s] that, on balance, ‘a competing public interest outweighs the public interest in encouraging settlement’” (Union Carbide Canada Inc. v. Bombardier Inc, 2014 SCC 35 ..read more

There has been confusion in the courts surrounding the applicable framework for determining applications under section 17 of the Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.) to retroactively reduce or rescind the amount of owed child support (Colucci v Colucci, 2021 SCC 24 [Colucci], para 3). This confusion has partly resulted from the courts’ need to consider numerous competing factors and interests when deciding applications under section 17. When addressing requests to vary child support arrears retroactively, there is a need to protect the “certainty and predictability provided by an existin ..read more