With respect, I must disagree with the appellant’s narrowly construed interpretation in reference to the test for determining the best interests of the children. In my view the scope of the issue that was before Neill J. is premised on the leading authority of Gordon v. Goertz, 1996 CanLII 191 (SCC), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27 (S.C.C.). In her reasons, the trial judge correctly set out the legal principles. Once any material change in circumstances is found to exist, a court may undertake a fresh examination of the best interests of the children and consider all of the relevant factors as outlined in Gordon v. Goertz, along with the criteria found in ss. 24 and 29 of the Children’s Law Reform Act.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.