Johansson v. Janssen, 2020 BCSC 469

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
JudgeSmith
Citation2020 BCSC 469
CourtSupreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
Docket NumberE192826
Date30 March 2020
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
4 practice notes
  • Y.Q. v. J.D.,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 17 Mayo 2021
    ...to repatriating children were not considered urgent because those children could not be brought home:  Johansson v. Janssen, 2020 BCSC 469 at para. [70]       In the meantime, through counsel, Y.Q. demanded video parenting time with A.D. On June 23, 2020, ......
  • Parenting In A Pandemic: The BC Courts Weigh In
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 23 Abril 2020
    ...whether a father's application for his children to return to BC from Germany constituted an urgent matter in Johansson v. Janssen, 2020 BCSC 469. It remains to be seen whether the Thomas v. Wohleber factors, or a similar test, will be adopted in In Johansson v. Janssen, the parties lived in......
  • Johansson v. Janssen,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 17 Noviembre 2020
    ...due to the COVID-19 pandemic and had put in place a process for hearing only the most urgent matters. In reasons for judgment indexed at 2020 BCSC 469, I held that the matter was not urgent because international travel restrictions then in force made immediate return of the children impossi......
  • Campbell v. Chan, 2020 BCSC 665
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 24 Abril 2020
    ...April 21, 2020. There was no response on the record before me to counsel for the mother’s April 13, letter. [39] In Johansson v. Janssen, 2020 BCSC 469, Justice Smith confirmed at para. 16 that passing the screening for RUH process “does not constitute a final determination that a matter is......
3 cases
  • Y.Q. v. J.D.,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 17 Mayo 2021
    ...to repatriating children were not considered urgent because those children could not be brought home:  Johansson v. Janssen, 2020 BCSC 469 at para. [70]       In the meantime, through counsel, Y.Q. demanded video parenting time with A.D. On June 23, 2020, ......
  • Johansson v. Janssen,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 17 Noviembre 2020
    ...due to the COVID-19 pandemic and had put in place a process for hearing only the most urgent matters. In reasons for judgment indexed at 2020 BCSC 469, I held that the matter was not urgent because international travel restrictions then in force made immediate return of the children impossi......
  • Campbell v. Chan, 2020 BCSC 665
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • 24 Abril 2020
    ...April 21, 2020. There was no response on the record before me to counsel for the mother’s April 13, letter. [39] In Johansson v. Janssen, 2020 BCSC 469, Justice Smith confirmed at para. 16 that passing the screening for RUH process “does not constitute a final determination that a matter is......
1 firm's commentaries
  • Parenting In A Pandemic: The BC Courts Weigh In
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 23 Abril 2020
    ...whether a father's application for his children to return to BC from Germany constituted an urgent matter in Johansson v. Janssen, 2020 BCSC 469. It remains to be seen whether the Thomas v. Wohleber factors, or a similar test, will be adopted in In Johansson v. Janssen, the parties lived in......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT