S. (L.) v. S. (C.), [1997] 3 SCR 1003

S. (L.) v. S. (C.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1003

L.S.                                                                                                     Appellant

v.

C.S.                                                                                                     Respondent

and

Seventh‑day Adventist Church in Canada                                        Intervener

Indexed as:  S. (L.) v. S. (C.)

File No.:  25894.

1997:  November 7.

Present:  L’Heureux‑Dubé, Gonthier, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec

Family law ‑‑ Custody ‑‑ Restrictions ‑‑ Religious activities ‑‑ Jehovah’s Witness ‑‑ Interest of child ‑‑ Access rights.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal, [1997] R.D.F. 215 (sub nom. Droit de la famille‑‑2618), [1997] Q.J. No. 373 (QL), affirming a judgment of the Superior Court.  Appeal allowed in part.

André Carbonneau, for the appellant.

Pierre‑Yves Morin, for the respondent.

Gerald D. Chipeur and Barbara B. Johnston, for the intervener.

//L’Heureux-Dubé J.//

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

1                 L’Heureux‑Dubé J. ‑‑ In cases involving the best interest of a child, we feel that it is appropriate to render judgment as soon as possible.  We are ready to render judgment now.

2                 Under the jurisprudence of this Court in these matters, the test is the best interest of the child.  In the circumstances of this case, given the evidence before us, we are not satisfied that the best interest of the child has been compromised by the practices of the custodial parent.

3                 Consequently, we are all of the view to allow this appeal in part, to quash the judgment of the Court of Appeal to modify the custody order rendered by the trial judge on June 9, 1995, to the extent of removing the restrictions imposed upon the appellant as regards the activities which she is entitled to do with or in the presence of her child.  As for the balance of the order, the access rights of the respondent are maintained as ordered by the trial judge.

4                 Each party to pay its costs throughout.

Judgment accordingly.

Solicitor for the appellant:  André Carbonneau, Montreal.

Solicitors for the respondent:  Pariseau, Cliché & Associés, Sherbrooke.

Solicitors for the intervener:  Milner, Fenerty, Calgary.