IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

[1]           THE COURT: This is an application by H.G. for a protection order under the Family Law Act. This application was brought ex parte and was set down by the registry for hearing before me.

[2]           H.G. and M.K. have a daughter. The child is now six years of age. They have been involved in litigation over parenting this child virtually since she was born. It is interesting that they live in the same house. M.K. lives upstairs and H.G. downstairs. Previous orders of this court have given each parent roughly equal parenting time.

[3]           Shortly after setting out the arrangement for the parenting time, H.G. has made various applications before the court. She initially made an allegation of physical assault against M.K.. This was dismissed by the Vancouver police.

[4]           In January 2018, she made an allegation of sexual interference by M.K.. Part of that included an application for a protection order. This came before Judge MacLean for hearing on March 12 and 13, 2018. Judge MacLean reserved his decision because the allegation of sexual interference was outstanding. He made an order on March the 13, which was varied by other judges on March the 16 and April the 12. Essentially, these orders give M.K. parenting time, supervised by his mother. Of significance, none of these court orders extended a protection order.

[5]           Now, the initial allegations before Judge MacLean were dismissed by the police closing their file. However, in May of 2018, H.G. made another allegation of sexual interference. The Vancouver police commenced another investigation. M.K. was questioned in July of 2018, and I assume detained, because he was released on an undertaking to appear, with a provision of no contact with H.G. and the child. That undertaking expired on October 2, 2018 when no charges were laid.

[6]           Apparently, the police still have an open file. There is an email that has been filed on this application indicating that the police file has been sent to the Crown counsel twice, and each time returned to the police. I take it that they are continue an investigation, all of which seems a bit odd, given that the alleged offence occurred as long ago as May 2018. There is also a part of an email on the file indicating that the Ministry of Children and Family Development have asked M.K. to not exercise parenting, pending the police investigation.

[7]           So the status quo is this: The order of Judge MacLean, with slight alterations, of March 13, 2018 is in place. It gives M.K. parenting time. It provides that his mother will be present during the visits. There is no court order restricting M.K. from having contact with his child.

[8]           The application before me is H.G. for a protection order. When asked for what reason, she says because M.K. can knock on her door and that makes her uncomfortable. I am not satisfied that H.G. has established the basis for a protection order and that is dismissed.

[9]           As I have said, the orders of March 13, March 16, and April 12 set out the parenting time with respect to M.K..

[10]        The practice of H.G. making applications ex parte must stop. She will not make any further application without leave of the court. If she makes such application, she must give notice of that application to M.K. and/or his legal counsel.