Related Blog Posts
Select a category:
Search by keyword:
The Concept of Guardianship: New and Improved?
With the coming into force of the Family Law Act (the “Act”) on March 18, 2013, the concepts of Custody and Guardianship have been significantly affected. Prior to the introduction of the Act, upon the dissolution of a marriage involving children, the Divorce Act (“DA”) and the Family Relations Act (“FRA”) governed issues surrounding parenting arrangements. The DA, dealt with Custody while the FRA dealt with both Custody and Guardianship. Thus, an overlapping concept of Custody existed under the DA and the FRA. This concept, while somewhat empty, was largely valued by clients for the perception of power and control it implied, while guardianship was valued for the rights it provided parents to be involved in the major decisions regarding the child.
Unfair Division of Property – Change in Standards
On March 18, 2013, BC’s new Family Law Act (the “Act”) came into force replacing theFamily Relations Act (the “FRA”). In the three months since enactment there have been few cases that have been decided solely under the new Act but in the recent decision of G.(L.) v. G.(R.), Brown J. had the opportunity to consider the change in standards in determining the division of property from the FRA to the new Act.
Fore-Warned: Negligence on the Golf Course
Chilliwack is blessed with some of the most beautiful and playable golf-courses around, and may have more golf per capita than anywhere else. When you
Child Support for Adult Children by Cristen Gleeson
Semancik v. Saunders We all know that the breakdown of a marriage can be hard on children. This is often hardest when the children are
A Warning to Sellers and Real Estate Agents About the Use of Property Disclosure Forms by Jason Filek
Krawchuk vs Scherbak A relatively recent case, Krawchuk vs Scherbak, from the Ontario Court of Appeal, is generating a lot of attention in Canada’s real
Court Affirms Need For “Convincing Evidence” Where Evidence of Injury is Entirely Subjective
In CARTER V. ZAHN, 2012 BCSC 595 (“CARTER”), a judgment released on April 24, 2012, Verhoeven J. held that requiring “convincing evidence” where a plaintiff presents only subjective evidence of ongoing injuries does not contradict Rothstein J.’s holding in F.H. V. MCDOUGALL, 2008 SCC 53 (“MCDOUGALL”) that there is only one standard of proof applicable to civil cases.