K. v. K. Date:, 2013 BCPC 223

Citation: K. v. K. Date: 2013 BCPC 0223 File No: 14810 Registry: Kamloops IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE MATTER OF THE FAMILY LAW ACT , S.B.C. 2011 c. 25 BETWEEN: D.J.K. APPLICANT AND: J.J.K. RESPONDENT REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE S.A. DONEGAN Counsel for the Applicant: Ms. B. Muliner

Place of Hearing: Kamloops , B.C. Date of Hearing: April 2, 2013 Date of Judgment: April 2, 2013 [ 1 ] THE COURT: This is a novel application for the court. A brand new piece of legislation has been introduced, the Family Law Act , which expands the definition of family member. Mr. D.K. [phonetic] -- pardon me, K. [ 2 ] D.K.: K. [ 3 ] THE COURT: K. -- [ 4 ] D.K.: Yes. [ 5 ] THE COURT: -- has applied for a protection order under s. 183 of the Family Law Act against his adult son. [ 6 ] Section 183(1) reads: 183

(1) An order under this

section (

a) may be made on application by a family member claiming to be an at-risk family member . . . [ 7 ] The first thing the court needs to determine is whether or not the applicant is a family member, as that term is defined in s. 1 of the Family Law Act. As I said, "family member" has a pretty broad definition and includes: (

d) a person who lives with, and is related to, (

i) the person So, on the evidence before me, Mr. K., Sr. is a “family member”. He lives with and is related to J.K., who is the person he is seeking a protection order against. [ 8 ] Next, the court must find that the applicant is an at-risk family member, as that term is defined. An "at-risk family member" is defined in s. 182 of the Family Law Act and that definition reads as follows.

It means: . . . a person whose safety and security is or is likely at risk from family violence carried out by a family member . . . [ 9 ] "Family violence" is defined in s. 1 of the Family Law Act and includes: Physical abuse of a family member . . .

And a number of other items that are not applicable here, as well as: Psychological or emotional abuse of a family member, including intentional damage to property. [ 10 ] So it is clear to me on the evidence of the applicant today, that he is not only a “family member”, he is an “at-risk family” and his safety and security is or is likely at risk from family violence by his 31-year-old son. [ 11 ] The court, pursuant to s. 183(2) of the Act , may make an order -- . . . against a family member for the protection of another family member if the court determines that (

a) family violence is likely to occur, and (

b) the other family member is an at-risk family member.

[ 12 ] For the reasons I have just outlined, I find that those two criteria have been established by the applicant's evidence today. I find that a protection order is an appropriate order to make today, so I do make that order pursuant to s. 183(2). [ 13 ] Now subsection (3) of that subsection includes a number of different terms that the court may impose.

There is also a general provision at the end of that section, allowing the court to impose any terms or conditions the court considers necessary to protect the safety and security of the at-risk family member or to implement the order. [ 14 ] I should say that I had reviewed s. 184 prior to hearing this application and was aware, at the time that the applicant was testifying, the number of risk factors that the court must consider. I have considered all of those risk factors. [ 15 ] The order will contain the following terms. Now I want to make sure I have his date of birth correct.

It is J. – [ 16 ] D.K.: June 17, 1981. [ 17 ] THE COURT: All right. J.J.K. [ 18 ] D.K.: K., yes. [ 19 ] THE COURT: K.; date of birth of June 17, 1981; must have no direct or indirect communication with or contact with his father. Madam Clerk, whenever I say "the applicant," his full name will be specified with the applicant. Except telephone contact. [ 20 ] D.K.: Yes. [ 21 ] THE COURT: Okay. Next, J.J.K. shall not attend at the – [ 22 ] D.K.: Mobile -- mobile home park – [omitted for posting] Mobile Home Park. [ 23 ] THE COURT: Is that what it is called? All right.

The mobile home park located on -- [ 24 ] D.K.: [omitted for posting]. [ 25 ] THE COURT: Located at [omitted for posting], also known as [omitted for posting] – [ 26 ] D.K.: [omitted for posting] Mobile Home Park. [ 27 ] THE COURT: -- Mobile Home Park. I will also include a term directing a police officer, including an RCMP officer, to remove J.J.K. from the residence of his father, located at Number [omitted for posting], in Kamloops, British Columbia. And the preceding terms should include Kamloops, British Columbia, Madam Clerk, if I did not specify. To remove him from that residence immediately. [ 28 ] Ms.

Muliner, or you, sir, any other terms that would be sought? [ 29 ] D.K.: No, Your Honour. That -- no. No, Your Honour, that -- that's fine. [ 30 ] THE COURT: No. Ms. Muliner, anything that comes to mind? [ 31 ] MS. MULINER: I think that covers what the applicant is requesting, Your Honour. I think that will cover it, what I understand in this case. (REASONS CONCLUDED)