With the introduction of family violence provisions in British Columbia’s Family Law Act in 2013 and the recent amendments to the Divorce Act, domestic violence is no longer a taboo subject in family law proceedings, no longer swept under the rug and ignored in favor of a focus on financial issues.  In 2022 the Supreme Court of Canada considered the issue of family violence in Barendregt v. Grebliunas 2022 SCC 22, finding  “untenable any suggestion…that domestic abuse or family violence has no impact on children and has nothing to do with the perpetrator’s parenting.” The court ..read more

“Marriages between the very old and the very young raise eyebrows and turn heads. In popular culture, a ‘May-December’ marriage invariably provokes the ire of adult children who deem the younger spouse a “gold-digger” and plot to protect their inheritance.” That is how Madam Justice Renu Mandhane began her judgment in Tanti v. Tanti et al 2020 ONSC 8063, a case where Mr. Paul Tanti’s son, Raymond became enraged when his elderly father married a much younger woman and took steps to interfere in their union, actions that culminated in what turned out to be an ex parte order giving Raymond guardi ..read more

1. Our Dress Code Does Not Include Stuffed Shirts 2. Talent Mandatory. Suit Optional 3. We Not Only Try Harder, We Try More Often 4. Your Success is Our Success 5. Minds Over Matter 6. We Can’t Protect Your Heart, But We Can Protect Your Rights 7. Winning At All Costs 8. All We Do Is Work 9. Lawyers You’ll Swear By. Not At. 10. Justice May Be Blind, But She Sees It Our Way 90% of the Time ..read more

In Zhang v. Chen 2024 BCSC 285 Ms. Zhang was successful in defending her husband Chen’s application for an order that the parties’ children, who lived with her in West Vancouver, be permitted to travel to China to spend time with their father. The court ruled that Chen’s application be revisited once a section 211 parenting report was completed and that in the meantime, parenting time in British Columbia be granted in accordance with Ms. Zhang’s proposal, and that video parenting time be afforded to Chen. Following this order, Zhang’s counsel sought special costs against counsel for Chen for t ..read more

                           The Eldridge’s met on an archeological dig, married in 1977, and as archeologists worked together in their consulting business, Millenia, for several years. Four children were born and Ms. Eldridge became their primary caregiver while her husband travelled to work sites. The parties separated in 2010 when Ms. Eldridge was 54 and her spouse 57, with one child with special needs remaining at home. They were divorced in 2016.  After year ..read more

 It happens in family law. Your client’s husband or wife, enraged at their spouse’s independence, usually marked by their retention of family law counsel, levels unwarranted, abusive attacks on their spouse’s lawyer. It can happen whether the attacking spouse is self-represented or has counsel. The goal is obvious: they want to undermine their spouse’s confidence in counsel and want to inflict as much turmoil and vengeance as they can. Pyper v. Schuetze 2023 BCCA 334 is such a case. The union between John Pyper and his wife broke down in September 2018 after he brutally assaulted her, in ..read more

After five years together, the parties in McCann v. Barens 2023 BCSC 2000 separated on Sept. 15, 2015, and Shaune Barens obtained a protection order against his wife, Jennifer McCann, on Sept. 23, 2015. The protection order was renewed on Sept. 29, 2015, when McCann failed to attend the follow-up hearing. However, the parties reconciled in early 2016 when McCann agreed to pursue treatment and attend marriage counselling. The protection order was cancelled on Feb. 9, 2016, and the parties continued in their marriage until May 2018, when Barens advised his wife that he wanted a divorce. In Septe ..read more

In JP v. KS 2023 BCCA 408 the court considered whether the registrar of the court had erred by denying JP’s application to submit limited portions of the oral transcripts from the court below for his family law appeal. The main issue on appeal was whether the trial judge erred in law by adopting certain facts and credibility findings from a prior civil proceeding for tortious battery between the parties. Pursuant to Rule 24(3) of the Court of Appeal Rules, a party must obtain transcripts of oral testimony if they are required to determine the issues raised on appeal.  JP asserted that ful ..read more

The problem? A 15-day family law trial with the claimant calling 21 witnesses. The answer? A trial management conference to discuss the trial process and review evidentiary issues.  In Bartch v. Bartch 2017 BCSC 1625 the parties attended such a conference in January 2017, where the presiding judge ordered the parties to exchange “will-say” statements and contact information for the witnesses listed in their respective trial briefs, to be provided no later than 3 months from the date of the order. In April 2017 the claimant provided two letters to the respondent which the chambers judge de ..read more

It is not unusual for parties in high conflict divorce to use social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram to gain support for their cause or vent their frustration with their spouse or the court system, particularly when children are involved.  In Butchart v. Pannell 2019 BCSC 599 Mr. Pannell complained to the court of his wife’s Facebook posts where she referred to him as a “deadbeat dad” and aired their divorce issues, arguably undermining his reputation and contributing to his stress.  The court remarked that Ms. Butchart showed little insight into the negative impact of ..read more