F. v. N., 2022 SCC 51
| Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
| Judge | Wagner, Richard; Moldaver, Michael J.; Karakatsanis, Andromache; Côté, Suzanne; Brown, Russell; Rowe, Malcolm; Martin, Sheilah; Kasirer, Nicholas; Jamal, Mahmud |
| Citation | 2022 SCC 51 |
| Docket Number | 39875 |
| Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
| Date | 02 December 2022 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
27 practice notes
-
M.A.B. v. M.G.C., 2022 ONSC 7207
...the best interests of the child (Young v. Young, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3 (S.C.C.), at paras. 74 and 202; Gordon, at pp. 50, 54, 68; F. v. N. 2022 SCC 51 (S.C.C.), at para. 61). As the Supreme Court of Canada stated in King v. Low, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 87 (S.C.C.), at para. 101, the ultimate aim ......
-
Mog v Cog,
...existence and that some evidence about that situation was revealed to Yungwirth J. 6 Can. T.S. 1983 No. 35. 7 Compare, for example, F v N, 2022 SCC 51 at paras 99, 110, 121 (majority) and 171 (dissent), 78 RFL (8th) 253. 8 Taking judicial notice of Court records is even older than The Queen......
-
MOG v COG,
...and that some evidence about that situation was revealed to Yungwirth J. [6] Can. T.S. 1983 No. 35. [7] Compare, for example, F v N, 2022 SCC 51 at paras 99, 110, 121 (majority) and 171 (dissent), 78 RFL (8th) [8] Taking judicial notice of Court records is even older than The Queen v. Jones......
-
Tsiriotakis v Rizzo,
...child: Young v. Young, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3, at pp. 99, 117; Gordon v. Goertz, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27, at paras. 28, 37, and 50; and F. v. N., 2022 SCC 51, at para. 100 These motions seek temporary parenting orders pending trial. This is a consent court ordered review that was required to take pla......
Get Started for Free
21 cases
-
M.A.B. v. M.G.C., 2022 ONSC 7207
...the best interests of the child (Young v. Young, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3 (S.C.C.), at paras. 74 and 202; Gordon, at pp. 50, 54, 68; F. v. N. 2022 SCC 51 (S.C.C.), at para. 61). As the Supreme Court of Canada stated in King v. Low, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 87 (S.C.C.), at para. 101, the ultimate aim ......
-
Mog v Cog,
...existence and that some evidence about that situation was revealed to Yungwirth J. 6 Can. T.S. 1983 No. 35. 7 Compare, for example, F v N, 2022 SCC 51 at paras 99, 110, 121 (majority) and 171 (dissent), 78 RFL (8th) 253. 8 Taking judicial notice of Court records is even older than The Queen......
-
MOG v COG,
...and that some evidence about that situation was revealed to Yungwirth J. [6] Can. T.S. 1983 No. 35. [7] Compare, for example, F v N, 2022 SCC 51 at paras 99, 110, 121 (majority) and 171 (dissent), 78 RFL (8th) [8] Taking judicial notice of Court records is even older than The Queen v. Jones......
-
Tsiriotakis v Rizzo,
...child: Young v. Young, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3, at pp. 99, 117; Gordon v. Goertz, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27, at paras. 28, 37, and 50; and F. v. N., 2022 SCC 51, at para. 100 These motions seek temporary parenting orders pending trial. This is a consent court ordered review that was required to take pla......
Get Started for Free
1 firm's commentaries
-
Examinations 2023 ' The Evolution Of Appellate Law In The Post-Pandemic Era
...protection of the on-board recordings. In April 2022, Bryan Smith and Lindsey Love-Forester represented the respondent in F v N, 2022 SCC 51, a case concerning international child abduction from the United Arab Emirates to Canada. This case marked the first time the SCC has addressed an abd......