Mobility quote of the month:
In Summary:
1. You have the right to leave the home any time you wish.
2. The only reason (safety concern) to remove a child from their home is one that is capable of being expressed, explained, or justified. (False allegations don't count!)
3. Your right as a "parent" does not trump the other "parent's" right to keep the child with them and, more particularly, the child’s right for continued regular contact with the left behind parent.
4. Parents, despite what they believe, their gender, etc... are not entitled to remove a child from their habitual residential home.
In this matter the "abducting parent", used false allegations of child abuse, to control the other parent by establishing a false status quo which the judge easily defused:
Justice Tausendfreund FTW!
Good Luck!
Tayken
PS: Think twice before pulling this stunt.
[35] The Respondent clearly had the right to leave the matrimonial home on April 29, 2016, or at any other time she wished. But absent articulable reasons to support her view that the child’s safety was likely to be compromised unless she removed Kinsly from the environment of the child’s home, her right to take Kinsly did not trump the Applicants right to keep the child with him and, more particularly, the child’s right for continued regular contact with her father. The Applicant’s mother had arrived from Thunder Bay to be of assistance to these parents at a time of some apparent discord between them. There is no evidence that Kinsly needed the protection of being removed from the home environment. The Respondent believed that she was entitled to act and made it happen.
Source: Cory v. Cory, 2018 ONSC 1273 (CanLII), par. 35, http://canlii.ca/t/hql1r#par35
Source: Cory v. Cory, 2018 ONSC 1273 (CanLII), par. 35, http://canlii.ca/t/hql1r#par35
1. You have the right to leave the home any time you wish.
2. The only reason (safety concern) to remove a child from their home is one that is capable of being expressed, explained, or justified. (False allegations don't count!)
3. Your right as a "parent" does not trump the other "parent's" right to keep the child with them and, more particularly, the child’s right for continued regular contact with the left behind parent.
4. Parents, despite what they believe, their gender, etc... are not entitled to remove a child from their habitual residential home.
In this matter the "abducting parent", used false allegations of child abuse, to control the other parent by establishing a false status quo which the judge easily defused:
[37] To the extent that Kinsly spent more time with her mother than her father since the date of separation, I find was due entirely to the Respondent’s manipulation. The Applicant has sought equal and shared custody from the time this Application issued on October 22, 2015. In deciding the question of custody, I will approach it on the basis that time with Kinsly should have been shared equally by her parents. I also have regard to the “maximum contact” principle enunciated in s. 16 (10) of The Divorce Act. There is no evidence on which I can conclude that equal and shared custody is not in Kinsly’s best interests.
Source: Cory v. Cory, 2018 ONSC 1273 (CanLII), par. 37, http://canlii.ca/t/hql1r#par37
Source: Cory v. Cory, 2018 ONSC 1273 (CanLII), par. 37, http://canlii.ca/t/hql1r#par37
Good Luck!
Tayken
PS: Think twice before pulling this stunt.
Comment