39.4 (1) In this section, “family arbitration award” has the same meaning as in the Arbitration Act, 1991. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Same (2) A person who has given notice of a proposed relocation in accordance with section 39.3 and who intends to relocate a child may do so as of the date referred to in the notice if, (a)  the relocation is authorized by a court; or (b)  no objection to the relocation is made in accordance with subsection 39.3 (5) and there is no order prohibiting the relocation. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Best interests of the child (3) In determining whether to authorize the relocation of a child, the court shall take into account the best interests of the child in accordance with section 24, as well as, (a)  the reasons for the relocation; (b)  the impact of the relocation on the child; (c)  the amount of time spent with the child by each person who has parenting time or is an applicant for a parenting order with respect to the child, and the level of involvement in the child’s life of each of those persons; (d)  whether the person who intends to relocate the child has complied with any applicable notice requirement under section 39.3 and any applicable Act, regulation, order, family arbitration award and agreement; (e)  the existence of an order, family arbitration award or agreement that specifies the geographic area in which the child is to reside; (f)  the reasonableness of the proposal of the person who intends to relocate the child to vary the exercise of decision-making responsibility, parenting time or contact, taking into consideration, among other things, the location of the new residence and the travel expenses; and (g)  whether each person who has decision-making responsibility or parenting time or is an applicant for a parenting order with respect to the child has complied with their obligations under any applicable Act, regulation, order, family arbitration award or agreement, and the likelihood of future compliance. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Factor not to be considered (4) In determining whether to authorize a relocation of the child, the court shall not consider whether, if the child’s relocation were to be prohibited, the person who intends to relocate the child would relocate without the child or not relocate. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Burden of proof (5) If the parties to the proceeding substantially comply with an order, family arbitration award or agreement that provides that a child spend substantially equal time in the care of each party, the party who intends to relocate the child has the burden of proving that the relocation would be in the best interests of the child. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Same (6) If the parties to the proceeding substantially comply with an order, family arbitration award or agreement that provides that a child spend the vast majority of time in the care of the party who intends to relocate the child, the party opposing the relocation has the burden of proving that the relocation would not be in the best interests of the child. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Same (7) In any other case, the parties to the proceeding have the burden of proving whether the relocation is in the best interests of the child. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Burden of proof, exception (8) If an order referred to in subsection (5) or (6) is an interim order, the court may determine that the subsection does not apply. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Costs of relocation (9) If a court authorizes the relocation of a child, it may provide for the apportionment of costs relating to the exercise of parenting time by a person who is not relocating between that person and the person who is relocating the child. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15. Section Amendments with date in force (d/m/y) 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1, s. 15 - 01/03/2021 Decision-Making Responsibility, Parenting Time and Contact — Extra-Provincial Matters