Few disputes in family law carry the emotional weight of a mobility application. One parent has a new job, a partner, or a support network waiting in another city, province, or country. The other parent is left facing the prospect of seeing their child far less often. For years, Alberta’s parents navigating this process worked within a fairly predictable court system. That system changed on January 2, 2026, when the Alberta Court of King's Bench rolled out the Family-Focused Protocol (“FFP”), introducing a new front door for every contested family law case: the Mandatory Intake Triage (“MIT”). If you are considering a move with your child, or opposing one, understanding both the legal test for relocation and this new procedural landscape is essential. At OP Lawyers LLP, our Calgary Family Lawyers can provide guidance with respect to the new process and how it impacts your potential relocation.

The Legal Test Has Not Changed, But It Is Being Applied With More Nuance

Mobility applications in Alberta are still governed by section 16.9 of the Divorce Act and, for unmarried parents, the Family Law Act. The Supreme Court of Canada's 2022 decision in Barendregt v Grebliunas remains the touchstone: there is no presumption in favour of or against relocation, and the only question that matters is what arrangement serves the best interests of the child. Alberta courts have spent the past few years fleshing out what that looks like in practice, and recent decisions give parents a much clearer picture than the case law of even five years ago.

In Laurence v Ross, 2025 ABKB 131, a mother sought to move her five-year-old from Calgary to Quebec to take a teaching position and reconnect with the family's francophone roots. The father opposed the move. The court granted the relocation, pointing to the mother's role as the child's primary caregiver since birth, a documented pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour by the father, and the child's linguistic and cultural connection to Quebec. The decision is a reminder that a parent's opposition to a move, on its own, carries little weight if the evidence does not show the move would harm the child.

Alberta courts have also shown they will scrutinize relocation decisions closely, even when those decisions come from an arbitrator rather than a judge. In AMLC v BDC, 2023 ABKB 179, the Court of King's Bench set aside an arbitrator's refusal to let a mother relocate from Edmonton to Manitoba to access Red River Métis cultural programming for her child. The court found the arbitrator had errored in the assessment of three best interest factors, the nature and strength of the child’s relationship with each parent; each parent’s willingness to support the child’s relationship with the other; and the child’s cultural, linguistic, religious and spiritual upbringing and heritage.  The case is a useful precedent for parents whose relocation plans involve reconnecting with cultural or family heritage, a factor Alberta courts are treating as genuinely significant rather than incidental.

Important Considerations

Best Interests of the Child: The main consideration in any mobility application is the best interests of the child. Factors such as the child’s history of care, emotional and developmental needs, the relationship with both parents, and the potential benefits or harms associated with the move. The court will assess the best interest of the child and the factors relevant under the Divorce Act and Family Law Act. Under the Divorce Act, a 60 day notice of any proposed relocation is also required.

Impact on Parenting Time: The court may consider how the proposed move will impact the child’s current parenting arrangements, whether the parent seeking to relocate is the primary parent or the parenting time being proposed for the parent that is not relocating. 

Reasons for the move: While this may not be determinative, the court may look at the reasons for the relocation and whether the decision is well planned. This can include job prospects, improved living conditions, access to family support or new relationships.

Impact on the child: The court will look at the impact of the move on the child and the arrangements that are going to be in place after a parent has relocated with the move. This can include arrangements for school, childcare, medical/health coverage. The courts will also assess the child’s network here in Calgary and loss of potential relationships, including those of close family members and friends. Generally, the younger the child, the less weight the court may give to the child’s network here in Calgary.

Another important consideration is the current parenting arrangements. Depending on whether it is a shared parenting schedule or not, the onus may be on one party to prove that it is in the best interest of the child to remain or relocate. At OP Lawyers LLP, our Calgary Family Lawyers and provide guidance with respect to a proposed relocation and provide clarity as it relates to onus and the best interest of the child analysis.

How the Family-Focused Protocol Changes the Process

The bigger shift for 2026 is not in the substantive law but in how a mobility dispute gets in front of the court in the first place. Under the FFP, contested family law applications, including mobility applications, are sorted into one of three streams: the Desk Process for consent or administrative matters, the Urgent Process for genuine emergencies, and the Regular Process for everything else. Most contested mobility applications will fall into the Regular Process, which now requires parents to clear several hurdles before they ever see a Justice.

Before filing a Request for a MIT Conference, both parents generally must complete the Parenting After Separation seminar, attempt some form of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation or settlement meetings, and exchange full and complete financial disclosure. A Case Management Officer reviews the intake package, and once it is approved, the parties have thirty days to book their MIT Conference, a one-to-two-hour hearing before a Justice of the Court of King's Bench. That Justice can grant interim relief, including interim parenting arrangements, set timelines, order expert assessments such as PN7, and narrow the issues in dispute. In most cases, the same Justice will then preside over a subsequent Settlement Conference.

For mobility applications specifically, this creates a new practical wrinkle: relocation is often time-sensitive, tied to a job start date, a lease, or a school enrolment deadline, but the FFP's front-end requirements are not waived simply because a move is looming. Affidavit material at the MIT stage is also tightly limited, which means the evidence that carried the day now has to be marshalled far more efficiently. Parents who believe their situation is genuinely urgent, for example where safety is at issue, should discuss the Urgent Process pathway with counsel early, since it operates outside the standard MIT stream.

What This Means for Parents

Whether you are the parent hoping to relocate or the parent hoping to keep your child close, two things now matter more than ever: getting your evidence tightly organized around the best-interests factors the courts are actually weighing and understanding how the MIT process will shape your timeline. At OP Lawyers LLP, our Calgary family lawyers help parents build a relocation case, or a response to one, that reflects both the current state of the law and the realities of Alberta's new court process. If you are facing a mobility application under the Family-Focused Protocol, reach out to our team to discuss how these changes affect your specific situation.

Disclaimer: This blog post is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice specific to your circumstances, please consult a qualified family lawyer at OP Lawyers LLP or another legal professional.