Vancouver Section 211 Child Custody, Parenting Capacity and Parenting Time Reports Do Not Bind BC Family Judges
As Vancouver child custody, guardianship, parenting time and child contact lawyers we often have our clients take part in a section 211 parenting capacity and ability report that also focuses on the needs of the child in the dispute.
If there is a serious issue relating to conflicting versions of events and alleged parenting deficiencies, or special issues related to the child, the court can order a section 211 report under our new BC Family law Act. Our Vancouver family lawyers can explain how these reports work. Call Lorne MacLean, Q.C. at 604 602 9000.
James Cudmore just helped establish new child relocation case law in front of Judge Dhillon of the BC Provincial Court. Mr. Cudmore was successful in having his client be permitted to move with the child from Vancouver to Seattle, Washington.
Mr. Cudmore also successfully persuaded the court that the report of a family justice counselor was deficient and encroached on the Judge’s ultimate decision making authority. As such the report recommending against the move was not followed by the Judge.
A proper section 211 child parenting capacity assessment must consider the best interests of the children in relation to the three broad subject areas set out in s. 211(1):
- the needs of the child in relation to the dispute;
- the views of the child in relation to the dispute; and,
- the ability and willingness of a party to a the dispute to satisfy the needs of that child.
Judge Dhillon concluded that proper section 211 reports should approach the issue as follows:
“[142] It is preferable for the author of a s. 211 report to note the parenting roles, significant relationships, and other factors relevant to the best interests of the child in his or her present location, and what may be available or proposed for the new location, and to set out a list of recommendations for parenting in either location and with either parent. In my view, it is not appropriate to decide the ultimate question of whether permission to relocate should be granted and to suggest the recommended orders of parenting for the court, including a transfer of custody, on the conclusions drawn by the author of the report.
“[143] I find that although the background information collected by [the assessor] is well presented and very helpful, I can not place great weight on the inferences she drew from that information or her recommendations concerning the changes to the parenting orders to be made in this case.
“[144] I have carried out an independent analysis having regard to the evidence at trial and have come to a different conclusion than recommended by [the assessor]. I have considered the submissions of the parties on where and in whose care the best interests of the child lie, following the tests under s. 69(3), s. 69(4)(a) and (b), and s. 37(2) of the FLA.”
If you want to discuss the need for a parenting capacity report, discuss how to effectively use a favourable report or discuss how to critique or attack a report you feel “got it wrong” call Lorne MacLean, Q.C. at 604 602 9000.
