Alberta Court Approves Child Relocation Despite Father’s Opposition

Case Overview

This case concerns a mobility application by Myrianne Ross (the Mother) to relocate her child from Calgary, Alberta, to Paspébiac, Quebec. The Father, Yanick Laurence, opposes this move, seeking shared parenting in Calgary or primary parenting if the Mother does not return. The dispute centers on the best interests of their 5-year-old child, taking into account care history, the child’s needs, family violence allegations, and the ability of each parent to provide care.

---

Why This Decision is Important

• The case illustrates how courts balance relocation requests with the best interests of the child, especially when allegations of family violence and coercive control are involved.
• It highlights the significance of family violence, including psychological and financial abuse, in decisions about parenting and mobility.
• The decision emphasizes the need for detailed evidence about the child’s emotional and physical safety and the parents’ ability to cooperate.
• It clarifies the court’s approach to burden of proof in mobility cases under Alberta’s Family Law Act.
• The ruling reflects how courts manage high-conflict custody disputes and prioritize the child’s well-being over parental convenience or preferences.

---

Case Details

Background

• The parties cohabited from January 2015 until separation in August 2024.
• The Child, born and raised in Calgary, is 5 years old.
• Both parents are originally from Quebec but have lived in Calgary for nine years.
• The Mother accepted a teaching job in Paspébiac and wishes to move there with the Child.
• The Father owns a construction company in Calgary and opposes the move.

Parenting History

• The Mother was the primary caregiver since birth.
• The Father worked long hours and had limited daily involvement.
• Post-separation, primary care remained with the Mother.
• Father’s parenting time has been temporarily suspended due to court orders following incidents of non-compliance.

Allegations of Family Violence and Coercive Control

• The Mother alleges family violence, including verbal abuse, controlling behaviour, and exposing the Child to unsafe situations.
• Specific incidents include the Father throwing plates, pushing the Child off a golf cart, and financial abuse such as unauthorized loans.
• The court found a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour, negatively impacting both the Child’s and the Mother’s well-being.
• The Father denies most allegations but showed hostility and disrespect in communication.

Child’s Needs and Well-being

• The Child suffers from anxiety and behavioural issues addressed by therapy.
• The Child is primarily francophone and more comfortable speaking French.
• The Mother argues that relocating will improve the Child’s social, linguistic, and educational opportunities, with family support in Quebec.
• The Father argues that stability and access to therapy in Calgary favour keeping the Child there.

Legal Framework

• The case is governed by Alberta’s Family Law Act focusing on the best interests of the child.
• Factors considered include physical, psychological safety, care history, family violence, cultural and linguistic needs, and parental ability to cooperate.
• The court applied principles from relevant case law such as Gordon v Goertz and recent amendments to family law statutes emphasizing protection from family violence.

---

Outcome

• The court granted the Mother’s application to relocate the Child to Paspébiac, Quebec.
• The decision was based on:
  • The Mother being the primary caregiver best able to meet the Child’s needs.
  • The presence of family violence and coercive control by the Father creating an unsafe environment.
  • The Child’s linguistic and cultural needs being better met in a francophone community.
  • The Father’s demonstrated inability to cooperate or provide a stable parenting plan.
• Recognizing the impact on the Father-child relationship, the court emphasized maximizing contact with the Father within safe limits.

---

Key Takeaways

• Primary caregiver status plays a significant role in mobility decisions when aligned with the child’s best interests.
• Courts increasingly recognize psychological abuse and coercive control as family violence, affecting parenting decisions.
• Relocation is permitted even if it impacts the other parent’s access, provided it serves the child’s well-being and safety.
• Parental hostility and lack of cooperation can negatively influence custody outcomes.
• Courts require parents opposing relocation to provide credible evidence and viable parenting plans if seeking primary care or shared parenting.
• Children’s cultural and linguistic needs are important factors in relocation cases.
• Courts will not speculate on hypothetical future behaviour (e.g., whether a parent will return after denial of relocation) without concrete evidence.
• Financial disclosure and good faith cooperation are essential elements for parents involved in custody disputes.

---

References

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abkb/doc/2025/2025abkb131/2025abkb131.html

The Legal Review Process by Spectrum Family Law

• Spectrum strives for high-quality, legally verified content.
• Content is meticulously researched and reviewed by our legal writers/proofers (usually local law students).
• Details are sourced from trusted legal sources like the Family Law Act.
• Each article is edited for accuracy, clarity, and relevance.
• If you find any incorrect information or discrepancies in legal facts, we kindly ask that you contact us with a correction to ensure accuracy.