As similar sentiment was expressed by MacLeod J. in Cook v. Kilduff, 2000 SKQB 347. He said this (at paragraph 15): By s. 5 the court is to have regard to the legal duty of the natural parent. [The stepfather] is entitled to expect the court to do its duty, namely, have regard for what it is directed by s. 5. Can this expectation be defeated by [the natural mother's] aloofness to the legal duty of the natural parent? I think not. It cannot be fair to have [the natural mother] stand aloof from that issue and benefit from it. It is specious to suggest that the child is the beneficiary, but [the mother] is not, and that, for the child's benefit, the requirements of s. 5 can be ignored.
"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.