Reported as: 2018 SKQB 88
Docket Number: DIV 652/12 JCR , QB17471
Court: Court of Queen's Bench
- Family Law � Custody and Access � Variation
Digest: The parties agreed to a consent order in 2016 regarding the terms of custody and access of their son who was then six years of age. The respondent applied to vary the consent order to obtain additional access. The respondent argued that there had been a material change in circumstances pursuant to s. 17(5) of the Divorce Act because as the child was older, more mature and in school full time, the judgment no longer suited him given his level of development as he could now appreciate travelling with the respondent. As well, the respondent�s income had increased which gave the child more opportunities.
HELD: The application was dismissed. The court found that the respondent had not established a material change in circumstances. The passage of time did not warrant changing the terms of the consent judgment, particularly in light of the fact that it had dealt with access with specific reference to the child�s school schedule and holidays. The increase in the respondent�s income was not a sufficient basis on which to find a material change in circumstances.
Federal Statutes Considered:
- Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2d Supp), s 17(5)
- Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2d Supp), s 17(6)
- Ackerman v Ackerman, 2017 SKQB 7, 136 WCB (2d) 266, 275 ACWS (3d) 538
- B.K.B. v J.L.L., 2016 SKQB 93, 265 ACWS (3d) 961
- Bromm v Bromm, 2010 SKQB 85, 353 Sask R 198
- Gordon v Goertz,  2 SCR 27, 134 DLR (4th) 321,  5 WWR 457, 141 Sask R 241, 19 RFL (4th) 177
- Klapak v Minty, 2015 SKQB 230, 481 Sask R 162