Escalating complexity, relentless pace, and unpredictable demands are placing unprecedented pressure on family law professionals. You’re expected to manage heavy caseloads, grow the business, lead teams, and deliver for clients, while somehow safeguarding your own well-being.

And then, without warning, you’re confronted with a challenge that changes everything.

In moments of turbulence like these, performance isn’t just about working harder, it’s about knowing how to lead yourself. How do you bolster resilience, make clear decisions under pressure, and continue to perform at a high level without sacrificing your health?

In this interactive keynote, industry-leading performance psychologist Dr. Karen MacNeill draws on decades of experience working with elite performers and leaders, offering a glimpse inside her Olympic Learning Lab. Participants will learn a practical self-leadership approach they can immediately apply to sustain energy, focus, and effectiveness—so they can burn bright, not burn out, no matter the circumstance.

In this interactive keynote, industry-leading performance psychologist Dr. Karen MacNeill draws on decades of experience working with elite performers and leaders giving you a glimpse inside her “Olympic Learning Lab” and teaching you a self-leadership practice that you can use to burn bright vs burning out no matter the circumstance.

Family law and policy in Canada has mostly been developed for the Western nuclear family using colonial concepts and processes. Laws are debated and passed by Parliament and interpreted by judges in a courtroom. Existing provincial and federal family laws do little to reflect Indigenous concepts of family, and Indigenous voices, values and priorities have been largely absent from the development of these laws.

The BC Ministry of Attorney General (Ministry) is in the process of reviewing the BC Family Law Act, with a view to modernize the act to ensure it continues to meet the needs of all families in BC. As part of the “Family Law Act Modernization project,” the Family Policy, Legislation and Transformation Division of the Ministry has engaged with Indigenous individuals and families from across the province over the past two years. These engagements have included in-person dialogue sessions in regions around the province, information sessions, and conversation circles with Indigenous peoples with lived experience in family law issues.

The engagement was designed to hear from Indigenous people about their experience of family law issues and the family justice system. It was a collaborative process to identify how policy changes and legislative amendments to the FLA might better reflect Indigenous values and practices and lead to better outcomes for Indigenous families.

The Ministry’s portion of the 2026 NFLP presentation will share information about the Indigenous engagement process as well as the outcomes. The presentation will highlight the resulting intended policy changes that will lead to proposed amendments to the FLA and the Family Law Act Regulation. These policy changes respond to the needs of Indigenous families, including amendments related to guardianship of a child, best interests of the Indigenous child, and protection from family violence. Although the policy changes will specifically relate to BC’s act, the concepts and principles of the amendments will be applicable to family law legislation across Canada.

The portion of the presentation by a BC Provincial Court Judge will reflect on the unique aspects of family law cases involving Indigenous families. The judge will discuss ways to incorporate Indigenous extended family, community members, Indigenous cultural practices and traditions in the court process. She will talk about the role of different people that may be involved in Indigenous family law cases (for example, extended members of Indigenous families, Elders, Matriarchs, etc.). She will also speak to the ways that Indigenous Family Law and Legal Orders can be recognized and enforced in courts across Canada. She will speak to the legislative basis and international instruments that recognize and uphold Indigenous Legal Orders. She may also reflect on how the amendments to the FLA might support her existing efforts or open the door to new processes when making decisions about an Indigenous child.

Exclusions in family law are often intricate, monetarily significant and the source of intense litigation. Complications are particularly prevalent when dealing with multi-generational family businesses and other assets that are emotionally charged. This paper and presentation will delve into cases that require complex tracing of assets, including those that have undergone corporate re-organizations and/or have been sold and converted into other forms of assets during a marriage. This paper will present a cross-country analysis of the law, case law and practical examples of these complex exclusions from a Chartered Business Valuator and Family Law Lawyer and propose best practices for how to address these kinds of cases, including suggestion of the form of evidence that may be required, key considerations and pro-active planning strategies.

In today’s digitally moderated world, digital technologies have become a central aspect of the family structure. Text messages are used to communicate, photos and videos document activities, shared calendars help organize the household, surveillance cameras assist with safety in the home, and digital trackers can track of where members of the family are. While these technologies can be a source of good in a functioning family, when a family breaks down these digital artifacts become a form of digital evidence that can assist courts in making decisions about the family. Some digital evidence can help illuminate the dynamics in a family in an authentic way. In other cases, it can be more complicated. For example, these technologies can be used in problematic ways to surreptitiously record family members or to create falsified information about them.

This session will explore some of the benefits and challenges that come with the increasing use of digital evidence in family law courts. In particular, it will look at the evolution of modern technologies that make it difficult for courts to know what is authentic and what is fabricated or manipulated evidence. With the introduction of generative AI, email spoofing tools, and photo editing tools, it can be difficult for legal actors to determine where evidence came from and how to utilize it in the legal system. Three recent examples in courts in the United States and Canada illustrate these challenges: one person submitted a victim impact statement in the form of a deepfake of a deceased family member, a self-represented litigant tried to use an AI avatar to make submissions on their behalf, and a witness claimed that audio recordings of his communication was in fact an audio deepfake.

This session will address three primary issues. First, it will provide information on the trends in Canadian family law courts on how courts have been addressing digital evidence. Second, it will highlight some of the common issues that people involved with the justice system should take into consideration when presented with digital evidence, including assessors, lawyers, and judges. Finally, it will highlight some modern trends in technology and identify potential issues that may arise with digital evidence.

The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction (“Hague Convention”) seeks to protect children from the harmful effects of abduction and retention across international boundaries. One of the defences to a return under the Hague Convention is the grave risk of harm to the child. Historically, this defence has been narrowly construed. However, research regarding the impact of domestic violence on children has expanded significantly. This session will look at practices in the respective presenters' countries and the impact domestic violence is having upon the case law in this area of international family law.

Sign up for this lunch is available upon registration. Spaces are limited and will be awarded on a first-come, first-served basis.

In most provinces child protection legislation in the 1990s set the stage for the protection of children from harm caused by the actual/risk of neglect/abuse by their parent or guardian. In this session we will discuss issues such as: what have we learned over the past 35 years? Has child protection legislation been reformed in any significant way and are the reforms helpful? How do courts prioritize child protection cases and what are the best practices? How can judicial led settlement conferencing be better utilized during a child protection case?  What will child protection law look like in 2056?

Family Law boutique firms often operate like a collection of solo/siloed practices or like a hive of workers serving the queen bee. Neither are ideal for retention, legacy or preventing burnout.

We will discuss strategies in firm management that require a change in mindset for sustained resilience and growth. Sometimes, the required course of action seems cointer-intuitive when, in reality, not taking such steps will hold your firm back from thriving. Culture matters.

This session will explore a range of unconventional income streams and their implications for support calculations, financial disclosure, and business valuation in family law matters. Through practical tools and case-driven insights, attendees will learn to manage the complexities that can arise when clients earn income from emerging and non-traditional sources.

The presentation will focus on illustrative case studies, including content creators, social media influencers, gamblers, sex workers, and other real-world examples in the gig-economy to highlight the unique challenges these cases present. The case studies will demonstrate how to assess income for support purposes when earnings are non-traditional, navigate disclosure challenges, and identify potential red flags.

We will examine relevant case law from traditional income contexts that offers guidance for addressing common issues arising with non-traditional income, along with practical application tips. Attendees will engage through polling questions related to each scenario.

Addressing issues of family violence, negotiating/knowledge imbalances, personality imbalances in both litigation and alternative dispute resolution (mediations and arbitrations). The paper will focus on how counsel and decision makers can help or hurt the perception of justice and fairness in resolving family law disputes, and how to manage the balance of legal principles (procedural fairness and natural justice) without ignoring the practical realities of disparities between the parties (information, bargaining positions and power imbalances), and giving the parties the best environment to resolve disputes

As Canadian families become increasingly diverse, courts are faced with the complex task of determining when and how cultural evidence should inform family law decision-making. This session will explore the evolving role of culture in the courtroom, examining how courts across the country have approached cultural and social-science evidence in matters such as family violence, parenting, and property division. Attendees will gain practical guidance through a proposed framework for tendering and assessing cultural evidence, including when expert evidence may be required, how such evidence should be admitted, and what safeguards can ensure fairness while avoiding bias. Participants will leave with concrete tools to navigate cultural issues in family law with greater clarity and sensitivity.

Paper (and presentation) will address critical current substantive and practice responsibility issues for family law lawyers and students, Justices, Masters, and academics.

Those issues involve

• (i) retention;
• (ii) legal services modalities (e.g., unbundling);
• (iii) conflicts;
• (iv) confidentiality and privilege;
• (v) disclosure and discovery;
• (vi) Internet insecurity;
• (vii) artificial intelligence and other technologies;
• (viii) discordant or toxic relations among lawyers and between them and courts;
• (ix) compensation;
• (x) Federation of Law Societies of Canada revisions to Model Code of Professional Conduct; to anti-money laundering and terrorist financing standards to model cash transaction, trust accounting and client identification and verification Rules; to national discipline standards, and to national mobility provisions.

This session covers tax and legal planning opportunities for individuals prior to marriage (including marriage contracts, carving out family property, and corporate succession planning), during marriage (including tax tips and traps when married persons transfer property, own shares, earn income and share in liabilities), and at the dissolution of marriage when income, property and liabilities are separated.

With the sharp increase in the cost of living, it stands to reason that there will be far more applications for a finding of Undue Hardship. Having recently obtained a successful decision on an application for a client, our research indicated that the case law appears to be highly varied and often quite creative. The question of how one obtains a successful decision, typically extremely rare, will become more salient in the coming years. We propose to present a wide-ranging overview of Undue Hardship applications including successes, failures, and trends across Canada. We would pair this with tips to help practitioners obtain success for their clients, whenever possible. We will also address what not to do and when to advise your client to walk away.

All attendees are invited to the program's opening reception on the Delta Hotel Grand Okanagan Resort's Grand Terrace immediately following the end of Monday's session. No advance registration is required. (Monday July 13, 4:30 PM)

This session focuses on how lawyers and judges can effectively navigate cases involving substance use by grounding advocacy in current addiction science rather than stigma or outdated assumptions. Misunderstandings about addiction can lead to legal positions, conditions, and court orders that conflict with best practices and can inadvertently destabilize families. Drawing on contemporary research and neuroscience, this session will help lawyers and judges set realistic expectations for clients, respond strategically to return-to-use (relapse) events, and advocate for safeguards and interventions that are both evidence-based and legally defensible. Participants will leave with practical, science-informed tools they can immediately apply in cases involving substance use.

Everyone knows that non-disclosure is the cancer of family law litigation, but what happens next once you’ve established that a party’s disclosure is deficient, or will never be satisfactory?

In this presentation, we will explore some of the avenues for incentivizing or compelling financial disclosure when a party fails to comply with an initial request or disclosure order, as well as when to make the call to accept that full disclosure is unlikely to ever happen and how to move forwards towards adjudication in the absence of complete information.

Some of the tools available to parties to chase financial disclosure include; (a) resort to statutory provisions including ss. 22, 23, and 24 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines or provincial family law legislation; (b) civil contempt proceedings; (c) striking pleadings; (d) Norwich (AKA third party production) orders; (e) over-imputation of income; (f) costs and/or financial penalties.

We will discuss some of the pros and cons of each approach, along with tips on how to decide between them.

If coercive remedies for non-disclosure have not proven fruitful and a cost-benefit analysis weighs against continued efforts, there can be procedural options when proceeding to trial without full disclosure (uncontested hearings, limited rights to participate or adduce evidence, etc.) as well as substantive implications (adverse inferences, imputation of income, etc.). We will explore some of the case law on trials where a non-disclosing party is handcuffed as a consequence of their conduct.

Many lawyers are also already familiar with adverse inferences as a concept, but we will review case law from across the country to provide examples of what drawing adverse inferences actually means in terms of determining income, assets, and liabilities (such as the “presuming the value of the undisclosed assets are at least equal to the value of the disclosed assets” approach and other approaches), and what evidence will be required for a successful adverse inference.

As a forensic accountant, business valuator, and frequent expert witness, Bailey Rivard will also touch on her role in collecting financial disclosure, how a lack of disclosure impacts her analysis, and what the implications are when it comes to the weight an expert’s evidence is given when it is based on an incomplete foundation.

This session will provide an overview of the laws pertaining to polyamory in Canada, with a specific view of how the Courts have considered Family Law issues where there are more than two individuals in a relationship. As with the end of any relationship, there may be issues pertaining to some or all of the following: guardianship, parenting, child and spousal/partner support, and the division of property. However, with more than two people in the relationship, the application of the laws in Canada sometimes becomes a little more challenging.

An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, Youth and Families, SC 2019, c 24 (the “Federal Act”) was introduced in 2019, and while the constitutionality of the Federal Act was quickly challenged, it was ultimately upheld in the Reference re An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis Children, Youth and Families, 2024 SCC 5. There has continued to be uncertainty regarding the application of the Federal Act as it relates to private guardianship, and the impact it has on the best interest of the child analysis.

This paper and presentation will outline the interplay between the Federal and Provincial legislation in relation to the best interests of an Indigenous child, which is highlighted in the recent Alberta Court of Appeal decision of AK v JJ, 2025 ABCA 345. This case involved two competing claims for the guardianship of an Indigenous child - the maternal Uncle and Aunt who live in Alberta, and the Father who lives in Ontario. The child had been apprehended at a young age, and was subsequently placed with the Uncle and Aunt, by way of consent, through a Customary Care Agreement. At the time of the trial, the child had been in the Uncle and Aunt’s care for nearly all of her life. The Alberta Court of Justice awarded guardianship to the Aunt and Uncle (JJ v AK, 2023 ABCJ 166), which was appealed by the Father to the Alberta Court of King’s Bench, and subsequently dismissed (JJ v AK, 2021 ABKB 467).

The AK v JJ, 2025 ABCA 345 decision provides clear direction that the Federal Act may apply to private guardianship applications involving Indigenous children, and the additional best interest factors provided under the Federal Act should be applied harmoniously with Provincial legislation. This presentation will highlight the key findings of this important decision, examine the Federal Act’s application to private guardianship, and identify best interest factors from the Federal Act to be considered alongside the relevant Provincial legislation.

The Authors/Presenters had the privilege of representing the Respondents, the child’s maternal Uncle and Aunt, at the Alberta Court of Appeal, and look forward to sharing their insight into this important development in family law.

Shared parenting after separation is increasingly common. In most cases, parents agree to a shared parenting arrangement and children benefit from ongoing relationships with both parents supported by parental cooperation. Shared parenting time orders are also increasing.

Historically, courts were reluctant to impose shared parenting on parents who were unable to cooperate; however, courts are increasingly ordering shared parenting in cases involving parental conflict, including cases with intimate partner violence and alienation allegations.

While shared parenting arrangements agreed to by both parents are generally beneficial, there is little research assessing the impact of shared parenting where the arrangement is court-ordered over the objections of one or both parents.

This presentation will present novel research on involuntary shared parenting time arrangements. We will begin with a summary of social science research on shared parenting, including what is known about how shared parenting impacts children and parents and gaps in understanding the relationship between shared parenting and parental conflict following separation.

We will then report on general trends in shared parenting law, including the shift towards shared parenting orders in contested cases.

Next, we will present findings from our two ongoing research studies (to be completed by December 2025). The first is an analysis of reported decisions from Ontario where shared parenting was ordered over the objections of one or both parents. The second involves interviews with children, parents, and lawyers involved in a subset of the analyzed cases. This is the first study to consider the long-term effects of court-ordered parenting time on families.

The presentation will close with policy and practice suggestions. Importantly, program participants will learn what happens in cases where shared parenting is court-imposed.

This session brings to bear the over 100 years of experience three child protection lawyers, representing children’s aid societies, parents and children, have in discussing how detrimental removing children from their families is in the long term. Additionally, Mr. Talbot, who also has the perspective of growing up in foster care in Ontario himself will speak to his personal experience.

When a Court is faced with an application by a Children’s Aid Society to remove a child from his or her parents, it is usually because there is some evidence of risk of harm to that child in the parents’ care. However, the Court does not have the ability to consider the further harm caused to the child by removing him or her from his family and sometimes his or her community, for what may end up being years, or even permanently.

The paper and the information in this program will allow participants to learn what a child experiences in a foster home, beyond being taken to a safe place. Children are community members as well as family members, and when removed from their homes, lose their connections to teachers, peers, sports coaches and other safe adults with whom they develop relationships, often compensating for the lack of care received at home. Siblings removed together are often separated in foster care, and find themselves, alone, living with strangers who do not look like them, do not eat the food they are used to and whom may even practice a different religion they are now expected to participate in.

Physical safety is important; but children lose out when they are taken from everything and everyone they have known, with no sense of when they will be reunited, and more times than not, moved multiple times. While foster care is family based care, foster children do not have the same status or privileges as natural children, and often are treated as second class citizens. Mr. Talbot will share his memories of growing up in care, and what that experience has left him with as an adult. The authors will discuss ways in which these consequences can be exposed and considered in a risk calculation, what lawyers can do to try to address these concerns and what the “system” can do to change this scenario, which has continued unchanged since the creation of the foster care system, over 100 years ago.

What has been the impact of the "new" relocation laws? Are a parent's chances of relocating any better? Do the burdens matter? How does the double-bind provision get applied? These questions and more will be answered.

This session is a deep dive into cohabitation agreements and marriage contracts including best practices, tips, pitfalls, considering the following:

Who: Consideration of the parties and how the contract reflects who they are - age, wealth, family planning. Tips for dealing with "interested parties" such as parents

When: Timing of negotiations and exchange of disclosure, consideration of standstill agreements, and post marriage contracts;

Why: Determine the main focus of the contract, and what/who it seeks to protect;

How: Importance of the process, how to incent the other party, drafting options including precedent clauses; and

What Not To Do: Types of contracts to avoid, what is "ILA" and other professional liability issues.

In the years since the 2007 Supreme Court of Canada decision Bruker v. Marcovitz, courts across the country have increasingly been called upon to adjudicate on religious aspects of family law cases. One such aspect which arises frequently is the issue of religious divorce. In some religions including Judaism and Islam, a person must obtain a religious divorce, in addition to a civil divorce, in order to remarry. Religious divorces typically require the consent or permission of the husband, meaning women are disproportionately adversely affected. Courts therefore must grapple with the idea of compelling a party to take steps to obtain a religious divorce and consider damages or fines for non-compliance.

Another religious consideration in family law which is becoming increasingly common in Canadian courts is the Islamic dowry or Mehr. The Mehr is a reverse dowry set out in marriage contracts pursuant to Sharia law payable from the husband to the wife. The Mehr often includes gold coins. The value of the coins can be substantial, ranging up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Canadian courts must first analyze whether Sharia law marriage contract is a binding and enforceable marriage agreement in this jurisdiction and second, determine if the Mehr should be paid and if so, determine the quantum payable.

With Canada’s immigrant population having steadily grown over the past decade, the religious aspects of family law cases are commonly at dispute and subject of litigation in our court system. In order to best serve our clients’ interests, we as family lawyers must be aware of religious intricacies for parties with religious marriages and the implications of them upon separation.

High incomes. Variation vs review. Post-separation income increases and decreases. Repartnering. Self-sufficiency. Lump sums. Retirement. Double-dipping. The end of support. And more....

Join us to recognize this year's recipient of the Philip M. Epstein Award for Excellence in Family Law. This biennial Award, awarded by Epstein Cole LLP, comprise $10,000 and free registration to the next National Family Law Program, a program very near and dear to Philip.

From Chaos to Control: Mastering the Business of Family Law will provide an engaging, interactive session designed to equip family law practitioners with practical strategies to strengthen and streamline the business aspects of their practice by offering real-world tools and fresh perspectives to help them manage with confidence and clarity. Using a series of fast-paced "short snappers," this presentation will cover essential topics such as navigating personal and professional risk, structuring a practice to make room for leadership, developing a client base, effectively on boarding and managing staff, navigating conflicts of interest, safeguarding finances, leveraging technology, and planning for long­term sustainability. The session will aim to provide valuable advice to all family law practitioners, including the unique challenges facing solo practitioners and small or rural firms.

Our paper will examine the evolution of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Boston v. Boston and its ongoing influence (or in some cases, lack of influence) over the past 25 years. The paper will explore how the concept of double dipping has been interpreted and applied in the contexts of spousal support, child support, and matters involving both child and spousal support obligations, across the country in appellate level decisions. Particular attention will be given to the limitations of Boston, including its inapplicability to certain types of property and the exercise of judicial discretion to prioritize fairness. The paper will conclude with a practical roadmap for practitioners offering strategies for advancing or defending against double dipping claims, as well as tips for drafting that reduce long-term uncertainty for clients.

The 2019 amendments to Canada's Divorce Act, which came into force on March 1, 2021, represented a significant shift in Canadian family law by requiring courts to consider the impact of family violence, to include conduct that constitutes “patterns of coercive and controlling behaviour that causes another family member to fear for their own safety or for that of another person.”

In this presentation, a comprehensive model of coercive-controlling violence (CCV) will be reviewed to provide a clearer understanding of what is required for a finding of CCV, the types of actor and target behaviours which may constitute types of CCV, and how level of risk may be assessed as a consequence of these constituent parts. Following this discussion, our attention will turn to how legal professionals might appropriately intervene, to include various practical approaches and intervention strategies. Remedies such as multipronged coordination (therapeutic interventions, parenting coordination), graduated responses (supervision orders and restraining orders), controller-focused approaches (counselling), direct victim-centred intervention strategies (mobility relief, parallel parenting, sole decision making), and financial remedies (spousal support and tort) will be explored.

Dr. Polak and and Mr Codas intend to address the dynamic of children refusing contact with parents (at varying degrees) from the perspective of a clinician and a practitioner dealing with these types of cases. We intend to offer a practical presentation along with suggested approaches to lawyers and judges about how to deal with these difficult cases when confronted by them.

An informal hosted lunch for practitioners working in the ADR space or interested in integrating mediation into their family law practice. This session offers space for discussion of current challenges, evolving best practices, and opportunities for collaboration in the ADR space. No additional cost; limited seating available.

Family law is uniquely positioned at the intersection of emotional intensity and relentless systemic pressures. High conflict cases, emotionally vulnerable clients, relentless deadlines, and a legal culture that often rewards overwork all contribute to growing concerns about burnout among family lawyers. The effects are not limited to personal distress, but include increased errors, diminished client service, and ultimately, the exodus of capable professionals from the field.

While family lawyers advocate for vulnerable clients navigating some of the most painful transitions in life, they themselves are often left without sufficient support. This presentation will explore the toll of family law practice in Canada, drawing on the most current and compelling research, including findings from Phases 1 and 2 of the National Wellness Study for Legal Professionals (2020–2022).

Importantly, this presentation offers evidence-based best practices and concrete tools to promote resilience and reduce psychological risk, both at the individual and organizational levels. From recognizing and responding to early signs of distress, developing professional boundaries with clients and colleagues, and fostering workplace cultures that support mental wellness, this session is particularly relevant to junior lawyers, firm leaders, educators, and anyone committed to cultivating a more sustainable approach to the practice of family law.

Grounded in research and also informed by real-world experience, this presentation aims to prompt thoughtful reflection, encourage honest conversations, and offer tangible strategies to ensure that we, the people who often advocate for others in crisis, are cared for — and able to thrive in the profession.

This presentation will examine the increasingly complex evidentiary landscape in family law, where procedural flexibility can at times clash with the need for reliability and fairness. Unlike criminal or civil proceedings, family law often tolerates a “loose” approach to admissibility, including social media evidence, text message, emails, surveillance video, and materials from children’s devices – some of which may be fabricated or manipulated. In many cases, evidence is introduced through affidavits without formal testing or cross-examination, raising concerns about reliability, authenticity, and prejudice.

The goal of this paper and presentation is to analyze how such evidence is being weighed under the best interest of the child standard and to consider the potential for prejudicial effects. It will also evaluate the tools we use to understand and present children’s voices in family proceedings, including expert parenting assessments, interventions, and evaluations, and discuss who – judges, psychologists, counsel for the child, mediators, or arbitrators – should be eliciting and interpreting children’s views. The core question this paper will pose is: how can we strike the right balance between flexibility and due process in a system where the rules are looser, the evidence more varied, and the consequences deeply personal?

This session will examine how courts treat post-separation developments, including significant changes in business value and the impact of external industry and economic shocks such as COVID-19. It will address whether and how these changes should influence equalization and support calculations. Key topics include:

How courts treat post-separation business performance in property valuation and income determinations;

The role of hindsight and foreseeability: what was known or knowable as of the valuation date;

Case law on post-separation value changes due to market volatility and broader economic or industry conditions;

Determining income for support during economic uncertainty; and,

Practical guidance for presenting or challenging financial evidence of post-separation changes in business value.

Through case law, practical examples, and technical insight, this session will help lawyers and financial professionals navigate the legal and valuation complexities that arise when business values and income shift after separation.

A solid understanding of the tax principles of family law is crucial to advising clients in both litigation and settlement discussions. The misapplication and misunderstanding of tax principles can be a source of negligence claims. A regular review of these tax principles is well-advised. In this session, we will review the tax impact of support amounts, lump sums, transfers of property and other common issues to be aware of in family law matters.

Recent caselaw has demonstrated that the treatment of Mahr and property division in Canadian jurisprudence remains misunderstood. While there is some understanding of basic Islamic legal principles, and the mahr (or maher or mehrieh) more discussion is required in the context of the division of property exercise.Review of cases where inclusion of the Mahr in the NFP calculation result in outcomes that contravene Islamic principles and lead to an unjust result, and alternative approaches explored.Addressing arguments based on Islamic legal principles seeking to disentitle a wife to her Mahr, particularly when she initiates the divorce.The audience (and paper) hopes to address how to properly account for the Mahr in the NFP calculation. The arguments for unconscionability, and when they should be raised. As well as public policy arguments for no fault divorce and the intersection of the Mahr.

Karon and Marty will present on the intersection of Family and Estate Law which will include common issues that arise when one party dies after separation as well as tips and tricks to avoid common pitfalls.  Karon's practice is in Ontario and Marty's is in Alberta which will provide insight into how the different jurisdictions address these issues.

This session will feature a panel of experienced family law arbitrators discussing difficult problems in arbitration, including questions from participants. Subjects may include: protecting the integrity of evidence provided by videoconference; noncompliance and the enforcement of awards and procedural orders; limits to the scope of arbitrators' jurisdiction; handling ex parte applications; the obligations of counsel during cross-examinations and examinations in redirect; and, the intersection of objections and procedural fairness when the rules of evidence are inapplicable.

Through a survey of case law and literature, this paper will explore the experience of disabled parents in the court process. In our presentation, the lawyers: Samantha Rapoport, Partner, Brown Henderson Melbye, Victoria, and Christina Doris, Partner, Burrison Hudani Doris, Toronto, will reflect on our personal experiences advocating for differently abled clients, and the psychologist/assessor Dr. Daniel Fitzgerald will provide insight into how a parent’s physical and mental health disabilities might impact an assessment of parental capacity.

Disparities persist for differently abled parents when they interact with court processes. Disabled parenting is often viewed, at least initially by the court, from a lens of “safety concern,” where the focus is on a parent’s deficits and not the adaptations that the parent has employed to navigate the world successfully in a differently abled body. A differently abled parent can find success in the court process where there is recognition that, despite even serious physical or health impairments, the parent can parent safely and independently with appropriate adaptations, including support persons, assistive devises, and learned parenting strategies.

The role of support persons is crucial though often misunderstood as demonstrating a disabled parent’s lack of independence, whereas the role of the support person is to assist the parent in maintaining independence and allowing that parent to live a “normal” life.

This is but one example of how misunderstanding and even bias can impact a differently abled parent’s ability to access reasonable parenting time after family breakdown. Maintaining strong and meaningful relationships between parents and children after family breakdown must be one of the goals of any family law system. By focusing not on the parent’s deficits, but rather on how the differently-abled parent has overcome those deficits to meaningfully parent to the benefit of their child, the court will be in a better position to determine parenting arrangements. It is important for the court to recognize that parenting is not a “one size fits all” model and that differences can be strengths.

A court must also be vigilant when considering the reasoning provided by an able-bodied parent to restrict a disabled parent’s time with their child. Disabled parents can be vulnerable within the dynamic of their relationships and can often be left more vulnerable on separation. While capacity and ability to parent are often objectively reasonable areas in which to problem-solve, a court must be alive to an able-bodied parent advocating an unduly restrictive approach.

The court must operate from a baseline that there is no level of disability that “automatically” makes someone unfit to parent. Rather, the exploration must be individualized, supported by evidence, and free from bias. Our hope for this paper and our presentation is to provide a toolkit to practitioners with the courage to take on these complex cases. Their advocacy can be nothing short of life-changing by preserving a parent-child relationship in objectively difficult circumstances.

This session will provide a comprehensive overview of crypto assets, their technological foundations, and how they are being addressed in case law and in dispute resolution. The first part of this presentation and paper will introduce blockchain technology, define common crypto assets, and explore methods to discover and trace these assets using public wallet addresses and explorer tools. The second part of this presentation and paper will review recent case law regarding how courts handle crypto assets and discuss practical approaches to managing them in financial disclosures and asset division.  Further, we will address how to divide crypto assets in a family law context and discuss tax consequences, capital gains, and jurisdictional rules. Please see a draft table of contents for the proposed paper attached.

Parenting Coordination is a dispute resolution process used to manage high-conflict parenting arrangements post-separation or divorce, pursuant to a court order or agreement. However, the scope and implementation of PC arrangements from province to province differs due to legislation, judicial findings and professional regulation. This paper examines and compares differences in legal authority, decision-making powers, qualification requirements and oversight of PCs across Canada. It will analyze case-law on the jurisdiction and limitations of PC practitioners and highlight inconsistencies in practice and regulation of PC arrangements province-to-province and identify best practices evidenced from the cross-country analysis.

This presentation addresses vexatious or abusive litigation behaviour, and how courts may deal directly with such behaviour. The speakers will begin by reviewing the court’s broad jurisdiction to control its own process, and the specific statutory or regulatory authority in different provinces and territories across Canada to find that a litigant has instituted vexatious proceedings or conducted a proceeding in a vexatious manner. They will then review the case law from across the country on the test and the powers of the court once the test is met, with a focus on family law cases.

The speakers will also examine the broader common-law doctrine of abuse of process by re-litigation, the related doctrine of res judicata, and how the family courts have considered litigation abuse, generally. Finally, the speakers will briefly discuss other remedies to consider when facing a vexatious litigant.

This presentation will explore issues of capacity in family law. Capacity issues can arise before proceedings have commenced, sometimes as a catalyst for separation, and also after proceedings are underway, causing ethical and procedural complications for spouses and their lawyers. Whether due to age, injury, or illness, capacity issues can arise at any time. What happens if a party has already made or acted on significant decisions such as inter vivos gifts, transfers of property, or initiated legal proceedings, notwithstanding a lack of capacity, diminishing capacity, or questionable capacity of themselves or a spouse? Capacity can fluctuate, making the determination more complicated. What if the impairment is undetected for some time? As capacity exists on a spectrum with differing thresholds and requirements for various legal decisions and instructions – what is the requisite capacity to form the intention to separate? Is the threshold the same as the notoriously low capacity required to marry? Especially when considering dividing assets, entering into settlement negotiations, agreements, or final orders respecting property or support – does separating and corollary relief require a higher level of comprehension, intention, and foresight?

What happens when a party “loses their mind” during your representation? As family law litigation can be lengthy, a client may have declining capacity and ultimately a loss of capacity during your representation such that a litigation representative is required. Adult children may ask, or be asked, to act as litigation representatives for their incapacitated parent, so as to continue, or even commence, litigation against their other parent or a stepparent. How should courts and lawyers navigate family proceedings involving a litigation representative, particularly where financial motives intersect with historical and emotional complexities of family relationships.

Lastly and relatedly, how should courts respond to predatory marriages, particularly short-term end-of-life marriages when capacity was already uncertain or deteriorating? With the prevalence of later in life marriages and divorces, longer life spans, cognitive impairments, and dementia – these questions are no longer rare and ought to be routinely considered by family law lawyers.

The goal of this paper and presentation is to provide family law lawyers with the tools to navigate the complexity of capacity issues in family law.

This paper and presentation will review and examine costs awards in family law cases across Canada. Courts are increasingly called upon to balance the need to deter inappropriate conduct and promote settlement with the unique realities of family litigation and challenges in awarding costs and reducing harm. including the frameworks used to award costs (and conversely, not award them) in family law jurisprudence.

It will also analyze the rationale in both awarding and not awarding costs in the family law context, especially matters involving children, self-represented litigants, situations of improper conduct (of parties and counsel) and cases involving power imbalances. This paper will also provide a practical discussion on seeking costs, the strategic use of with prejudice communications, including the impact of settlement offers, going over family lawyer best practices for seeking costs and arguing against costs.

This paper and presentation aims to examine national trends in costs awards in the family law context, including in high conflict cases, cases involving self-represented litigants and if special considerations are given in situations of parenting/support/property. There will also be an element of comparative analysis across jurisdictions, perspective from the judiciary, and examining the practical nature of enforcing payment of costs awards.

This presentation will explore the increasingly complex intersection between family law and criminal law particularly focusing on the use of Emergency Protection Orders, Protection Orders, Restraining Orders, King’s Bench Protection Orders, Peace Bonds, and release conditions. These mechanisms – designed to provide immediate protection – can have significant intended and unintended impacts on parenting rights, property access, and the presumption of innocence. Even when criminal charges are withdrawn or dismissed, the consequences in the family law realm can be long-lasting and severe.

The goal of this paper and presentation is to examine the legal standards for granting such orders, the evidentiary burdens at each stage, and the inclusion (or exclusion) of children in these orders. By analyzing current practices and recent case law, this presentation will consider whether these orders are being granted too readily and what safeguards might be needed to ensure fairness in concurrent proceedings.

This session explores one of the most contentious and evolving areas in Canadian family law: the distinction between legitimate protective parenting and unjustified parental alienation or gatekeeping. This raises critical questions about evidence, motivation, and judicial response. These cases are further complicated by the limitations of the current psychological and legal frameworks, access to experts, alignment of expert professionals which do not always provide clear guidance on how to distinguish alienation from protective behaviour, especially in the absence of third-party verification or where children's true voices are difficult to assess, and how much weight you put on a child's voice is so fact dependant. We will examine decisions, emerging patterns in parenting assessments, and the evolving role of mental health professionals in these disputes. Emphasis will be placed on how courts assess credibility, the role of interim orders, and the importance of early intervention to prevent entrenchment of dysfunctional dynamics.

Our learning objectives for attendees will include understanding legal definitions and thresholds. We will provide a review and update on alienation cases since, insight on how mental health experts deal with these allegations, and provide tips and tricks on effective strategies for managing these cases in and out of court, including interim parenting arrangements, therapeutic interventions, and use of court-appointed experts. This session addresses the critical need for clarity and balance in high-conflict parenting disputes where the line between protection and alienation is blurred. As legal professionals, our responsibility to uphold the best interests of children demands a nuanced and evidence-based approach. Attendees will leave with enhanced tools for identifying, assessing, and advocating effectively in these emotionally charged and legally complex cases with a little bit about how to manage these very complex and demanding cases while balancing your own mental health and well being.

Parenting issues often dominate family law disputes, arguably for good reason given the “high stakes”. However, as counsel and judges are well-aware these disputes come at significant financial and emotional cost to parents/parties/litigants, professionals,  the family justice system, and most importantly, to the children themselves.

Many of these cases can (and should) resolve at an early stage.

This session focuses on strategic and practical pointers in working with parties  to devise parenting time schedules and enduring decision-making regimes that are child-centric and reduce parental conflict.  

The session will explore various ways to incorporate the child’s views and preferences into the early resolution of family law disputes. Particular challenges in appropriately incorporating a child’s views and preferences, such as for young children, where there are clinical issues, in relocation cases or where a child is resisting contact, and options to address this challenges, will be included as well.

Skilled professionals can move unreasonable and emotional litigants to child-focused resolutions using a “roadmap” approach.

Key concepts include: defining, detailing, assigning, clarifying and reviewing the relevant elements of the plan/order. Conflict-driven considerations (and avoidance of same) will include appropriate parenting plan provisions dealing with communication, transportation, schedule changes and relocation. Tips relating to the application of the AFCC-Ontario Guide / Template will be reviewed, as well as the relevant and appropriate ADR processes, the social science literature, legislation and caselaw.

Testimonial safeguards are routine in criminal trials, having been introduced by amendments to the Criminal Code and now bolstered by a wealth of jurisprudence.  In the family context, however, there is very little about such testimonial safeguards for victims of domestic violence in any province. If available at all, much is left to judges’ general discretion to control their own procedures. In many jurisdictions, there is no guidance about what factors a judge would consider or what procedure would be employed to determine whether such an order is justified. Even in jurisdictions where there is a specific rule enabling an order requiring counsel for the purpose of cross-examination, such as rule 33.09(2) in Nova Scotia, for example, there is little in the way of jurisprudence or procedural guidance. The dearth of authority can deter lawyers from making these motions.  

When it comes to children, most provinces have some form of an office of the child but not all handle it the same.  Lawyers should consider what is available beyond their province’s borders in making additional requests that are not the norm for their province if it can have a positive impact for the child involved in their case.

This presentation and accompanying paper will give lawyers a toolkit for family lawyers to use when seeking testimonial safeguards for witnesses, including their clients who have been the victims of domestic violence, children and other vulnerable witnesses.