CANADA Law and Practice Contributed by: Lorne MacLean, KC, Fraser MacLean, Sophie Bartholomew and Rana Yavari, MacLean Law
These protections arise from a combination of: • federal legislation (including the Divorce Act, which emphasises the best interests of the child); • provincial and territorial family law statutes and court rules; and • the courts’ inherent jurisdiction and common‑law authority to control their own processes. In practice, children are almost always anonymised in reported family law decisions across Canada, either by court order or by judicial and media convention. Written reasons commonly use initials or pseudonyms for children and, in many cases, for parents as well. Parents and other parties may request anonymisa ‑ tion or other protective orders referenced in 2.8 Media Access and Transparency in Financial Proceedings . The process varies slightly by jurisdiction but gener ‑ ally requires: • a formal application or motion under the applicable court rules; and • affidavit evidence demonstrating that the request ‑ ed order is necessary to protect the child from harm, stigmatisation, or risks to safety, privacy, or wellbeing.
Courts assess such requests using a proportionality analysis, balancing:
• the child’s best interests and risk of harm; • privacy and safety considerations; and • the public interest in court openness.
In urgent or sensitive circumstances, courts may impose anonymisation or publication restrictions on their own initiative, even without a formal application – particularly where child safety, family violence, or privacy concerns arise during a hearing. Overall, while family courts remain presumptively open, child‑related proceedings receive heightened protection, and anonymisation is both common and readily available where necessary to safeguard chil ‑ dren against emotional and mental harm.
80 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook