In Ontario, Canada, the core principle for determining child custody is the “best interests of the child”. The court needs to comprehensively evaluate the parenting conditions of both parents, the needs of the child, family relationships and other factors. According to Section 24 of the Ontario Family Law Act, the following three conditions are the key dimensions of the court’s review. The following is an analysis based on specific judicial cases:

I. Guardian’s ability to raise children and stability

The court will first examine whether the guardian can provide a continuous and stable living environment for the children, including but not limited to financial support, emotional companionship and growth guidance. Specific review factors include:

  • Financial support ability: You need to prove that you have a stable source of income and can afford the reasonable expenses of your children’s education, medical care, and living expenses. The court usually requires proof of income for the past three years, tax bills, and alimony calculation tables (refer to the Canadian Child Support Guide)
  • Stability of living environment: whether the living conditions are suitable for children’s growth (such as the quality of school districts, residential safety), and whether there are plans for major changes in the short term (such as cross-border relocation)
  • Emotional and educational support: whether the child has enough time to spend with the child, whether the child can be helped to complete school work and cultivate interests, and whether there is a history of domestic violence, abuse or neglect of the child.

▶ Ontario case: Smith v. Jones (2023)

When the father claimed custody, he provided proof of a high-paying job, but the court found that he was on frequent business trips, which meant that the children could only spend 6 hours a week with him, and the apartment he lived in was an open-plan single-family apartment, which did not provide independent study space for the children. In contrast, the mother had a slightly lower income but stable working hours, lived in a room dedicated to the children, and was responsible for the children’s after-school tutoring for a long time. In the end, the court ruled that the mother was the primary guardian.

II. Children’s wishes and welfare needs

When children are over 12 years old, their reasonable wishes are usually taken into consideration by the court; for younger children, the court will indirectly understand their emotional tendencies through social worker interviews, psychological assessments, etc., but the welfare of the children is still the highest criterion. Specific judgment factors include:

  • Age and maturity of children: The wishes of children aged 12-16 are given a higher weight, but their ability to understand and the authenticity of their expressions need to be proven; the continuity of care for younger children (such as which parent mainly takes care of their daily life, food, and transportation to school) is key
  • Impact on the original living pattern: Will the change of caregiver lead to the separation of children from the existing school, social circle, and cultural environment? For example, for children who have been cared for by their grandparents for a long time, a sudden change of care location may be considered a disadvantage
  • Meeting special needs: If a child has a physical disability, mental illness, or special educational needs, the court will give priority to the party who can provide professional medical or educational resources.

▶ Ontario case: Chen v. Chen (2022)
The 15-year-old daughter clearly told the court that she wanted to live with her mother, saying that her stepmother was indifferent to her after her father remarried, and her mother lived near her high school and supported her to continue learning piano. The court combined the conclusion of the social worker’s report that “the mother-daughter relationship is close and the father is less involved in the children’s extracurricular life” and determined that living with the mother is more in line with the children’s emotional and developmental needs.

III. The quality of the existing relationship between parents and children

The court values ​​the continuity of the parenting relationship and the quality of interaction, and tends to maintain the parenting model to which the child has adapted unless there is serious misconduct. Key points for review include:

  • Co-parenting history: whether one spouse has primary caregiving responsibilities (such as daily care and medical decisions) during the marriage, and the frequency and involvement of the other spouse in visits
  • Willingness to promote parent-child relationships: whether the child actively supports the communication between the child and the other parent (such as actively cooperating with visitation arrangements and not defaming the other parent’s image). On the contrary, if there is intentional obstruction of the other party’s visitation, it may reduce the probability of obtaining custody
  • The overall stability of the family environment: including parents’ ability to manage emotions, the frequency of family conflicts, and whether there are factors that affect children’s mental health (such as long-term quarrels, substance abuse problems)

▶ Ontario case: Brown v. White (2021)
After the parents separated, the children lived with their mother, but the father visited them regularly every week and participated in school activities. Both parties maintained basic cooperation on child support. Although the father’s income was higher than the mother’s, the court believed that the mother had established a stable care model and the father’s visitation rights were fully protected. The court ultimately ruled to maintain the existing child support arrangement and the father was required to pay child support according to the guidelines.

Practical operation points

  1. Evidence preparation checklist:
    • Daily care records of children (such as pick-up and drop-off times, medical vaccination records, and school communication records)
    • Proof of income, proof of assets and basis for calculating child support
    • Testimony from third-party witnesses (such as evaluations from children’s teachers, doctors, and social workers)
    • Evidence of the other party’s misconduct (such as police records, psychological counseling reports, and attention should be paid to the legality)
  2. Legal procedure tips: Ontario courts usually require both parties to try mediation or collaborative family law procedures first. If no agreement can be reached, the court will decide through litigation. During the litigation, it may be necessary to entrust a children’s lawyer or the Family Responsibility Office to conduct an investigation and assessment.

concluding remarks

The determination of child custody is not simply a comparison of economic conditions, but a systematic assessment of the “best interests of the child”. It is recommended that the parties entrust a lawyer familiar with Ontario family law at the beginning of the dispute to fully demonstrate their own custody advantages and respond to the other party’s claims through professional evidence sorting and legal argumentation. The final court ruling usually takes into account the special circumstances of the case, so it is crucial to formulate a litigation strategy based on the specific case.

(Legal basis for this article: Sections 24-26 of the Ontario Family Law Act; Article 3 of the Canadian Child Support Guidelines; and relevant cases of the Ontario Supreme Court)

JZW Law has an experienced team of high net worth divorce lawyers. They are fluent in both Chinese and English and provide professional legal services. We specialize in handling complex property division, corporate equity, trusts, overseas assets and other related issues. We provide initial consultation services, and you are welcome to contact us for more information or to schedule a consultation.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you need legal help, please consult a professional lawyer.