View Single Post
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2015, 12:54 PM
BF BF is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 21
BF is on a distinguished road
Default

More (only so many characters per post, I apologize):

B. Conduct of a parent

[180] Section 16(9) of the DA limits consideration of a party’s past conduct to conduct relevant to their ability to parent.

[181] In D.L.S. v. R.S., 2012 BCSC 977 (CanLII), aff’d on appeal 2012 BCCA 406 (CanLII), at para. 173, I commented on the reasons underlying the principle that s. 9 of the DA limits the role of past conduct in matters relating to child custody:

The law is clear, both in statute and in case authority, that judges are not to consider past conduct unless the conduct is relevant to the ability of that person to act as a parent of a child. Prof. McLeod, member of the University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law, captured the essence of the evidentiary rule against considering past conduct when he commented, “[a] person may be a poor spouse but a satisfactory parent. A person may even be a poor parent to one child but a good one to another” (Stark v. Stark (1988), 1988 CanLII 3394 (BC SC), 16 R.F.L. (3d) 257 (B.C.S.C.), head note comment).
Reply With Quote