BC Court of Appeal Recognizes the Myth of False Allegations of Intimate Partner Violence

<p dir="ltr">We have both written previously on myths and stereotypes about intimate partner violence (IPV), one of the most common of which is that women make false or exaggerated claims of violence to gain an advantage in family law disputes (see here and here). In KMN v SZM, 2024 BCCA 70 (CanLII), the British Columbia Court of Appeal (BCCA) recognized the existence of this myth and the need for courts to avoid making assumptions that perpetuate it, holding that it is erroneous to do so unless there is an evidentiary basis for a finding of false allegations. This judgment came just a week before the Supreme Court of Canada released a decision on rape myths and stereotypes, in which it reiterated its recognition of the myth of “false allegations of sexual assault based on ulterior motives” (R v Kruk, 2024 SCC 7 (CanLII) at paras 35-37). The Supreme Court has not yet acknowledged the myth of false allegations of IPV in the family law context, however.</p><p dir="ltr">This post will describe the underlying parenting dispute between KMN (the mother) and SZM (the father) and the trial court and BCCA’s reasons for decision, followed by our commentary on the significance of the latter decision. In addition to its holding on the myth of false allegations, the BCCA underlined the importance of courts making findings of fact when family violence is raised in parenting disputes, and of considering the impact of children’s direct and indirect exposure to family violence.</p>