S.Z. v. D.Z., 2015 BCSC 2157, deals with a mobility application. Mom wanted to move the children away from dad so they could participate more fully in activities like hockey and cheerleading.
The reason for relocation is, of course, a factor for analysis in the Gordon mobility framework. Justice Voith says the following about sports on this point:
“I do not make light of the importance of sports or other such activities. Sports can teach children many important values. They can be a source of both confidence and of great enjoyment. However, absent extraordinary circumstances … sports and other recreational activities should complement a child’s life rather than dictate the circumstances of that life.”
This is an important judgment for BC family lawyers to bear in mind when facing a mobility application that is motivated by the children’s activities.