BC Supreme Court gives mother sole parenting responsibility in light of absent father

In a recent family law matter, the Supreme Court of British Columbia granted a mother sole parenting responsibility and decision-making authority, considering the father’s lack of involvement in the proceedings and uncertain whereabouts.

The parties in this case married in India in 2003. They moved to Canada, where they raised two children, now aged 17 and 15. The couple separated in November 2019 after the father faced criminal charges related to family violence, which resulted in a conviction in January 2021. Since the separation, the children have resided solely with the mother.

Despite initiating legal proceedings, the father showed little interest in moving the case forward and failed to provide the required disclosures. The court denied the adjournment that he requested shortly before the trial, which proceeded with only the mother’s participation.

The father requested spousal support on the basis that he had supported the mother’s education. On the other hand, the mother sought sole parenting responsibility for the children. She cited the father’s absence and history of substance abuse and violence.

Father gets no parenting time

In Sehra v Sehra, 2024 BCSC 1444, the British Columbia Supreme Court granted the mother sole parenting and decision-making authority under s. 41 of B.C.’s Family Law Act, 2011 and s. 16.3 of the Divorce Act, 1985. The father did not get any parenting time, given his lack of involvement and uncertain whereabouts.

The father had to pay $562 per month in child support until October 2025, when the court would review his obligation as one child reaches adulthood. This amount was based on his income, imputed by the court at $35,000 per year due to the lack of reliable income information from him.

The court rejected the father’s claim for spousal support since the evidence showed that loans financed the mother’s education and failed to show that he had suffered economic hardship due to the marriage or its breakdown.

The court ordered an equal division of the family home’s sale proceeds totalling $165,000, subject to adjustments for payments made from the funds for child support and for loans deemed family debts. The father’s share of the proceeds would be held in trust to cover future obligations.

Lastly, the court decided that the mother should retain ownership of a motor vehicle, which she had been solely responsible for maintaining and financing since the separation. The court also awarded her costs upon acknowledging her efforts to move the case forward in the absence of cooperation from her former spouse.