Young v. Stephens, 2015 NSCA 86
| Judge | Bourgeois, J.A. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada) |
| Case Date | September 17, 2015 |
| Jurisdiction | Nova Scotia |
| Citations | 2015 NSCA 86;(2015), 365 N.S.R.(2d) 192 (CA) |
Young v. Stephens (2015), 365 N.S.R.(2d) 192 (CA);
1151 A.P.R. 192
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2015] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. SE.043
Shelley Anne Young (appellant) v. Michael Stephens (respondent)
(CA 441193; 2015 NSCA 86)
Indexed As: Young v. Stephens
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
Bourgeois, J.A.
September 29, 2015.
Summary:
Parents of a now five year old child had for most of the child's life alternated custody on a weekly basis. The child was now starting school. The parents did not live close enough to each other to permit alternating custody to continue. A custody order provided that it was in the best interests of the child that the father be the primary care-giver, with access to the mother. The mother appealed and moved to stay the custody order pending disposition of the appeal.
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, per Bourgeois, J.A., dismissed the motion.
Family Law - Topic 1918
Custody and access - Appeals - Stay pending appeal (incl. when stay may be lifted) - Parents of a now five year old child had for most of the child's life alternated custody on a weekly basis - The child was now starting school - The parents did not live close enough to each other to permit alternating custody to continue - A custody order provided that it was in the best interests of the child that the father be the primary care-giver, with access to the mother - The mother appealed and moved to stay the custody order pending disposition of the appeal - She argued that the child would be physically harmed in the father's care, that the child would lose the benefit of being immersed in her cultural heritage (Mi'kmaq), and that the child's mental and psychological well-being could be irreparably harmed if a stay were not granted - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, per Bourgeois, J.A., dismissed the motion - The mother's fear of physical, mental or psychological harm were not supported by the evidence and the father was actively supporting the child's exposure to the Mi'kmaq language and culture - The evidence did not give rise to special and persuasive circumstances justifying a stay.
Cases Noticed:
Chiasson v. Sautiere, [2012] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 211; 2012 NSCA 91, refd to. [para. 6].
Counsel:
Daphne Williamson, for the appellant;
Kim Johnson, for the respondent.
This motion was heard on September 17, 2015, at Halifax, N.S., in Chambers before Bourgeois, J.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, who delivered the following judgment on September 29, 2015.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Green v. Green,
...circumstances of a special and persuasive nature that a stay would better serve, or cause less harm to, the children (Young v. Stephens, 2015 NSCA 86, para. 7, per Bourgeois, J.A.). [19] Justice Bourgeois, in Young v. Stephens, explained the origins of the onus borne by an applicant for a s......
-
Titus v. Kynock,
...circumstances of a special and persuasive nature that a stay would better serve, or cause less harm to, the children (Young v. Stephens, 2015 NSCA 86, para. 7, per Bourgeois, J.A.). [19] Justice Bourgeois, in Young v. Stephens, explained the origins of the onus borne......
-
J.H. v. A.C., 2020 NSCA 54
...circumstances of a special and persuasive nature that a stay would better serve, or cause less harm to, the children (Young v. Stephens, 2015 NSCA 86, para. 7, per Bourgeois, J.A.). [19] Justice Bourgeois, in Young v. Stephens, explained the origins of the onus borne by an applicant for a s......
-
Green v. Green,
...circumstances of a special and persuasive nature that a stay would better serve, or cause less harm to, the children (Young v. Stephens, 2015 NSCA 86, para. 7, per Bourgeois, J.A.). [19] Justice Bourgeois, in Young v. Stephens, explained the origins of the onus borne by an applicant for a s......
-
Titus v. Kynock,
...circumstances of a special and persuasive nature that a stay would better serve, or cause less harm to, the children (Young v. Stephens, 2015 NSCA 86, para. 7, per Bourgeois, J.A.). [19] Justice Bourgeois, in Young v. Stephens, explained the origins of the onus borne......
-
J.H. v. A.C., 2020 NSCA 54
...circumstances of a special and persuasive nature that a stay would better serve, or cause less harm to, the children (Young v. Stephens, 2015 NSCA 86, para. 7, per Bourgeois, J.A.). [19] Justice Bourgeois, in Young v. Stephens, explained the origins of the onus borne by an applicant for a s......