View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2015, 01:50 PM
BF BF is offline
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 21
BF is on a distinguished road

Originally Posted by OntarioDaddy View Post
What does BC say DV is/isn't?
OntarioDaddy, this is the research I have sourced regarding the new BC family law:

Legal Presentation as “Facts"
You can cite case law from any jurisdiction: Ontario, Alberta, etc. The purpose of the citation is to show that other courts have ruled a certain way in certain fact situations, and so the court should defer to the precedent set.

Case law is particularly influential on a court when made by a court of equal or greater jurisdiction or "stare decisis et non quieta movere"; to stand by decisions.

Decisions from outside the jurisdiction can be influential on a judge without being binding. The factors that are involved are:
(a) Seniority of court;
(b) Reputation of the judge, if any;
(c) Relative reputation of jurisdictions; and,
(d) Most important, the facts. Applicable legislation is a part of the facts.

Ideally, a party is able to support their position with appellate jurisprudence from their jurisdiction. However, if the fact situation is novel, the only case law may exist out of province (or even out of country). In those situations, it can be compelling to show how other courts have addressed the issues.

This is the portion of law the above paragraph I’d like to refer to. It came in force on March 18, 2013:

[SBC 2011] CHAPTER 25

"family violence" includes
(a) physical abuse of a family member, including forced confinement or deprivation of the necessities of life, but not including the use of reasonable force to protect oneself or others from harm,
(b) sexual abuse of a family member,
(c) attempts to physically or sexually abuse a family member,
(d) psychological or emotional abuse of a family member, including
(i) intimidation, harassment, coercion or threats, including threats respecting other persons, pets or property,
(ii) unreasonable restrictions on, or prevention of, a family member's financial or personal autonomy,
(iii) stalking or following of the family member, and
(iv) intentional damage to property, and
(e) in the case of a child, direct or indirect exposure to family violence.

Please forgive the misalignment of the points above. Should be fairly clear where they belong as sub points.

More in next post.
Reply With Quote