T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Judge | Honourable Madam Justice Matthews |
| Citation | 2020 BCSC 1628 |
| Date | 30 October 2020 |
| Court | Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) |
| Docket Number | E200735 |
-
- 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
4 practice notes
-
Joseph v. Washington,
...submit that, in accordance with the doctrine of paramountcy, the issue should be determined under the Divorce Act: T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628 at para. 42. I agree. [94] The relocation issue may not be decided independently from the overall question of the parenting arrangements: K.W. v.......
-
C.E.N. v. B.K.N.,
...family, schools, and the community he or she has come to know. [63] The case of T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628 [T.T.] at para. 59, sets out seven factors for the consideration of the best interests of a child as (a) ......
-
R.P. v. G.U.,
...with his mother. I note that my reasoning on this point is also similar to the reasoning of Madam Justice Matthews in T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628 at paras. 53-58, where she found a move from Burnaby to Saanich was a [73] For the reasons stat......
-
S.Z.M. v. K.M.N.,
...decision; however, where there is an operational difference, the Divorce Act governs, because it is federal legislation: T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628. [35] In A.B. v. C.D., 2014 BCSC 1081, Mr. Justice Kelleher emphasized that the foremost and overall consideration under the Divorce Act is......
4 cases
-
Joseph v. Washington,
...submit that, in accordance with the doctrine of paramountcy, the issue should be determined under the Divorce Act: T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628 at para. 42. I agree. [94] The relocation issue may not be decided independently from the overall question of the parenting arrangements: K.W. v.......
-
C.E.N. v. B.K.N.,
...family, schools, and the community he or she has come to know. [63] The case of T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628 [T.T.] at para. 59, sets out seven factors for the consideration of the best interests of a child as (a) ......
-
R.P. v. G.U.,
...with his mother. I note that my reasoning on this point is also similar to the reasoning of Madam Justice Matthews in T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628 at paras. 53-58, where she found a move from Burnaby to Saanich was a [73] For the reasons stat......
-
S.Z.M. v. K.M.N.,
...decision; however, where there is an operational difference, the Divorce Act governs, because it is federal legislation: T.T. v. S.Z.T., 2020 BCSC 1628. [35] In A.B. v. C.D., 2014 BCSC 1081, Mr. Justice Kelleher emphasized that the foremost and overall consideration under the Divorce Act is......