MacLean Law’s parenting time right of first refusal lawyers focus on the principle of maximum contact. MacLean Law is ranked as a tier 1 UHNW family firm because we repeatedly win the toughest ultra high net worth cases including our focus on Mandarin Chinese high net worth family law disputes.
First Right of Refusal: This type of provision typically reads that if a parent who is scheduled to have the child/ren in his or her care and control and is unable to care him/her/them for a period of 48 hours or more, the other parent will be given an opportunity to care for her. If the notified parent cannot care for him/her/them, the notifying parent will make appropriate child care arrangements at his or her own expense;
DO NOT LET UNEXCERCISED PARENTING TIME GO TO WASTE: RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL
不要浪费未行使的育儿时间：优先照看权 Tel: 604 602 9000
Right of first refusal in Family Law child parenting cases allows a parent who is not exercising parenting time (the “Off-Duty Parent”) to have the first opportunity to take care of the child should the other parent who is exercising parenting time (the “On-Duty Parent”) not be able to take care of the child due to sudden work commitments, social activities, or other unplanned events which would render the On-Duty Parent unable to care for the child.
家庭法中的“优先照看权”（Right of First Refusal）赋予未正在行使育儿时间的一方父母（“非值班父母”）在对方正在行使育儿时间的父母（“值班父母”）由于突发的工作安排、社交活动或其他意外事件而无法照看孩子时，优先获得照看孩子机会的权利。
Section 37 of the Family Law Act empowers BC courts to take into account the best interests of the child when enforcing an agreement or making an order with respect to children. The courts will order right of first refusal when it is in the best interests of the child. Right of first refusal is commonly viewed as a tool to benefit the best interests of the child, not as a benefit to either parent T.C. v. K.C. 2019 BCSC 1299 para 171. In the more recent decision of B.C.B. v. W.D.J.B. 2022 BCPC 89, the BC Provincial Court took into account the best interests of the child and ordered that should the mother travel without the child, the father should be with at paragraph 36 of the Decision.
“优先照看权”通常被视为一项旨在保障子女最大利益的工具，而非为了让任何一方父母受益（参见：T.C. v. K.C. 2019 BCSC 1299，第171段）。在较新的案例 B.C.B. v. W.D.J.B. 2022 BCPC 89 中，卑诗省省级法院同样以子女最大利益为出发点，并在裁决书第36段中命令：如果母亲在未带孩子的情况下外出旅行，则应由父亲照看孩子。
More specifically, Section 37(e) of the Family Law Act states:
更具体地说，《家庭法案》第37条第(e)款规定如下：
“Best Interests of Child
子女的最大利益
“37 (2) To determine what is in the best interests of a child, all of the child’s needs and circumstances must be considered, including the following:
第37条第(2)款 为了判断什么符合子女的最大利益，必须考虑子女的所有需求和情况，包括但不限于以下各项：
…
(e) the child’s need for stability, given the child’s age and stage of development;
(e) 鉴于子女的年龄和发展阶段，子女对稳定性的需求；
…”
Therefore, when the On-Duty Parent is unavailable, it is generally in the best interests of the child to have parenting time with the Off-Duty Parent, as that parent is typically the individual whom the child is the most familiar with. This ensures that the child is not suddenly introduced to another individual or environment they are not familiar with.
因此，当“值班父母”无法照看孩子时，让“非值班父母”行使育儿时间通常符合子女的最大利益，因为该父母往往是孩子最熟悉、最有安全感的人。这种安排有助于避免孩子突然接触陌生的人或不熟悉的环境，从而维护其情感稳定与安全感。
Courts will also consider the “maximum contact principle” which is one of the most important considerations in determining parenting arrangements.
MacLean Law’s huge win in the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Young v. Young 1003 CanLII 34 (SCC) is the seminal case with respect to the maximum contact principle. At paras. 117-118 of the Decision, the court held that:
法院还会考虑“最大接触原则”（maximum contact principle），这是在决定育儿安排时最重要的因素之一。加拿大最高法院在具有里程碑意义的案件 Young v. Young, 1993 CanLII 34 (SCC) 中对该原则作出了权威解释。该案第117至118段指出：
“Third, s. 16(10) provides that in making an order, the court shall give effect “to the principle that a child of the marriage should have as much contact with each spouse as is consistent with the best interests of the child.” This is significant. It stands as the only specific factor which Parliament has seen fit to single out as being something which the judge must consider. By mentioning this factor, Parliament has expressed its opinion that contact with each parent is valuable, and that the judge should ensure that this contact is maximized.“
“第三，第16(10)条规定，在作出命令时，法院应贯彻‘婚生子女应在符合其最大利益的前提下，与每一方配偶保持尽可能多的接触’的原则。这一点意义重大。它是国会唯一明确指出法官必须考虑的具体因素。通过提出这一点，国会表达了其立场，即与父母双方保持接触对孩子是有价值的，法官应当确保这种接触最大化。”
Courts could consider the maximum contact principle when making right of first refusal orders. It is typically, but not always, in the child’s best interest to have maximum contact with parents. Accordingly, when the On-Duty Parent is unavailable, an argument could be made that the child should be in the care of the Off-Duty Parent so that the child has maximum contact with his or her parents.
法院在作出“优先照看权”相关命令时，可以考虑“最大接触原则”。虽然该原则通常符合子女的最大利益，但并非在所有情况下都适用。然而，基于该原则，可以提出这样的主张：当“值班父母”因故无法照看孩子时，应让“非值班父母”承担照护责任，从而确保子女与其父母有最多的接触机会。
Right of first refusals do not have to be ordered through court, and they are often provided for in family law agreements. Ensuring that a separation or cohabitation agreement has a clear and unequivocal right of first refusal clause could minimize conflict between parents and provide clarity as to who will be responsible for the child should one parent be unavailable. Properly drafted right of first refusal clauses in agreements can also reduce the chances of a costly parenting time court application
“优先照看权”不必通过法院强制下令，通常会在家庭法律协议中予以规定。确保分居或同居协议中包含明确且无歧义的“优先照看权”条款，可以最大程度地减少父母之间的冲突，并明确当一方父母无法照看孩子时由谁负责照顾孩子。协议中妥善起草的“优先照看权”条款还可以降低因育儿时间安排产生昂贵诉讼的风险。
MacLean Law regularly deals with right of first refusal matters in and outside of court. If you suspect that the On-Duty Parent is not exercising his or her parenting time when they should be, you may be able to seek an order to take over parenting responsibilities from that parent. Whether you need help resolving an active issue with parenting or preventing one from arising, MacLean Law has the expertise to ensure that your child’s best interests are protected.
MacLean Law 律所经常处理法院内外的“优先照看权”相关事务。如果您怀疑“值班父母”在应当行使育儿时间时未尽职责，您可能有权申请法院命令，接管该父母的育儿责任。无论您是需要帮助解决现有的育儿争议，还是希望防止问题的发生，MacLean Law 都具备专业经验，确保保护您孩子的最大利益。
If your preferred first Mandarin Chinese call our emergency family hotline at 中文热线：604 682 6466
