A Pilot Project is being undertaken as part of this Court’s response to the new tort of intimate partner violence established by the Supreme Court of Canada in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, 2026 SCC 16.
The procedure for adjudicating claims for intimate partner violence is guided by the foundational purpose of Rule 70 to secure the just, most expeditious and least expensive determination of every family proceeding on its merits and the principles of proportionality articulated in the King’s Bench Rules (“KBR”) 70.02.1(1) and 70.02.1(2) respectively. The following procedure applies to the tort of intimate partner violence.
Statement of Claim A claim based on the tort of intimate partner violence (IPV) shall be set out in a statement of claim pursuant to KBR 70.03(8)(b) and filed in the Court of King’s Bench (Family Division).
Filing a Stand-alone IPV Claim Where there are no initiating pleadings seeking statutory relief, including a petition for divorce, petition, notice of application and a notice of motion to vary, a stand-alone statement of claim for IPV may be filed.
Contested Proceeding When the times specified by KBR 18 and 19 for filing and serving a responding pleading have expired, counsel or a self-represented party may contact the case conference coordinator to schedule a case conference for the contested proceeding. Case conference briefs shall be filed by the parties. The trial dates for the proceeding will be set by the case conference judge at the first case conference. The parties shall ensure that there has been full disclosure of relevant documentation respecting the issues ofliability and damages with authorities related to claimed damages.
Default In the event no responding pleadings are filed, default under KBR 19 may be noted and the matter will proceed on an uncontested basis. A requisition noting default and a motion and affidavit in support of the claim shall be filed.
IPV Claim where Initiating Pleading seeking Statutory Relief filed Where there is an existing initiating pleading seeking statutory relief, including a petition for divorce, petition, notice of application, and a notice of motion to vary, a statement of claim based on the tort of IPV shall be given the same file number, as the existing proceeding involving the same parties.
Where the statement of claim is filed prior to the first case conference, the claim shall be automatically joined with the initiating pleading in the existing proceeding.
When a claim based on the tort of IPV has not been filed prior to the first case conference, a motion for joinder under KBR 5.01(1) may be filed and served and heard by the case conference judge.
A statement of claim based on the tort of IPV will not be subject to triage screening by the triage conference coordinator under KBR 70.24(19).
Claims for statutory relief and the tort of IPV, including liability and damages, shall beheard by the trial judge at the same time.
Prior Amendment to Initiating Pleading Where an initiating pleading has been amended prior to the issuing of this Practice Direction to include an IPV tort claim, the triage/case conference judge will determine whether the amendments are sufficient to adjudicate the issues of liability and damages.
If the amendments are not sufficient to adjudicate these issues, the initiating party will file a statement of claim and the responding party will file responding pleadings, as directed by the triage/case conference judge.
Coming into effect This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.
On May 5, 2026, the Court of King’s Bench issued a Practice Direction providing for the presumptive remote appearance of accused who are in custody at a Provincial Correctional Centre at detention review hearings under sections 520 and 525 of the Criminal Code unless counsel advise at least five full business days prior to the scheduled hearing date that the accused is to appear at the hearing in person. Since becoming effective on September 8, 2026, the Court has had requests for the accused to appear in person for the purpose of having the accused sign their supporting affidavit with the required administration of oath or affirmation.
The Criminal Proceedings Rules of the Manitoba Court of King’s Bench, SI/2016-34 (Canada) provide as follows: Affidavit of applicant in custody 9.03 (4) When the applicant is in custody, the registrar may accept the applicant’s unsworn affidavit for filing if … (b) the applicant is to appear at the judicial interim release hearing by video link and the truth of the contents of the unsworn affidavit is to be confirmed by the accused to be true at the hearing.
Accordingly, instead of requesting the transportation of the accused, subject to a direction otherwise by the presiding judge, an available option is for the accused when they appear by video in the courtroom to then confirm the truth of the contents of their affidavit.
Where an individual seeks a variation of an order for release issued by the Court of King’s Bench under s. 520, s. 521, s. 522 or s. 525 of the Criminal Code and the Crown consents to the variation, an application may be made in writing, without the necessity of a court appearance, using the attached form “Application to Vary by Consent” (see link: application_to_vary_by_consent.pdf). The form is to be completed by the applicant’s counsel or the applicant, if self-represented, and submitted to the Crown for consent. The form can then be submitted to the court. The judge may require a hearing if not satisfied on the basis of the form that a variation is appropriate. If the judge approves the variation, the applicant and any surety must attend the court office to sign the variation form before it becomes effective.
Coming into effect: This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.
On June 10, 2026, the Court of King’s Bench Statutory Rules Committee approved amendments to King’s Bench Rules 4.02, 27.02, 70.24(12), 70.24(17), 74.06(2)(e), 74.06(3)(d), Forms 4A, 4C and 70BB, and Item 2 of Form 76G of the French Version of the King’s Bench Rules. The amended Rules and Forms come into force on September 1, 2026.
On June 29, 2026, the Court of King’s Bench Statutory Rules Committee approved an amendment to subrules 70.24(6) and 70.24(31.1) to provide that the Associate Chief Justice (Family Division) may issue practice directions related to those Rules, which amendments come into force immediately.
Attached to this memorandum is a detailed list of pleadings and their procedural treatment in the court process. The attached Table of Family Proceedings applies in all Court of King’s Benchjudicial centres.
This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.
"The purpose of this Practice Direction is to further the goal of providing timely and meaningful judicial intervention and assistance to families engaged in family disputes. It is to encourage the expeditious scheduling of a triage conference in family proceedings as is required by the Family Case Flow Scheduling Model.
Parties involved in a family proceeding are entitled to participate in a triage conference which provides the opportunity to resolve contentious matters in a timely manner. Timely access to early and meaningful judicial intervention is a cornerstone of the Family Case Flow Scheduling Model. To the extent that timely access is now being compromised by an increasing number of adjournments related to the Triage Screening List, this issue must be addressed.
Triage Screening List Adjournments
King’s Bench Rule (KBR) 70.24(16) requires a party seeking a triage conference to file and serve a Request for Triage Conference (Form 70D.2), a Certificate of Prerequisite Completion (Form 70D.3) and a triage brief on the other party at least fourteen (14) days before the triage screening date.
KBR 70.24(17) states that the responding party must file and serve their Certificate of Prerequisite Completion and triage brief no later than four (4) days before the triage screening date. Where a responding party fails to file and serve their Certificate of Prerequisite Completion and triage brief four days before the triage screening date as is required, the family proceeding is adjourned on the Triage Screening List. There have been cases where a family proceeding has been adjourned repeatedly as a result of the failure of a responding party to file and serve the required documents.
The failure of a responding party to file and serve their triage documents may be the result of the parties wishing to focus on settlement discussions. Regrettably, the failure may also be due to a responding party attempting to delay the scheduling of a triage conference.
Counsel are reminded that in the event of unnecessary delay in setting the date of a triage conference, a moving party should seek an order from an associate judge forthwith. An associate judge will grant the appropriate order and cost award if requested, to ensure that a moving party is able to proceed to triage on a timely basis
Effective February 3, 2026, where a proceeding appears on the Triage Screening List a third time, the required triage documents of the moving and the responding parties must be filed, failing which it will be struck off the List on a without prejudice basis. Only where the Associate Chief Justice has granted an adjournment, which will be granted only in exceptional circumstances, will the proceeding not be struck off the list.
A proceeding that has been struck off may be brought back on the Triage Screening List by filing a new Request for Triage Conference (Form 70D.2) and a requisition with payment of the filing fee.
Scheduling A Triage Conference
The Triage Conference Co-ordinator advises counsel and/or the self-represented party(ies) by email when all applicable prerequisites in a family proceeding have been satisfied. The email sets out the available hearing dates for a triage conference and requests that counsel and/or the self-represented party(ies) confirm their availability by return email no later than 11:00 a.m. on the Tuesday Triage Screening List.
Ms. Angie Tkachuk, Triage Conference Co-ordinator, presides over the Triage Screening List every Tuesday from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. She may be contacted by email or by teleconference.
In the event that neither counsel nor the self-represented party(ies) respond to the email from the Triage Conference Co-ordinator, the proceeding will be struck off the Triage Screening List on a without prejudice basis.
The proceeding may be brought back on the Triage Screening List by filing a new Request for Triage Conference (Form 70D.2) and a requisition with payment of the requisite filing fee.
Coming into effect
This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately."
To reflect the obligation of a judge to ensure that a self-represented litigant has the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the hearing and has a reasonable opportunity to present his or her case to the best of his or her ability, where a motion or application involving a self-represented litigant is to be contested before a judge, prior to the hearing of the contested motion or application, a judge may require the parties to appear at one case management conference with a judge for the purpose of the judge ensuring that the contested matter is ready to proceed, to explain the process and to otherwise advise the self-represented litigant what may be expected. Such a conference may be held by the judge at the time of the appearance on the Civil Uncontested List or may be scheduled before a judge for up to a one-hour period at 9:00 a.m. on a different day.
This practice direction addresses the process by which a plaintiff may, subject to the Court’s discretion, seek to have the originating pleadings and related court records anonymized (i.e., for a plaintiff to be identified using the pseudonym “Unnamed Person” rather than their full legal name). The Court may, at its discretion, make an anonymity order to permit a plaintiff to bring proceedings anonymously in exceptional circumstances where the public interest in open courts is displaced by another important public interest.
The Manitoba Law Library would like to acknowledge with gratitude that we are situated on Treaty One Territory, the traditional lands of the Anishinaabe, Cree and Dakota peoples, and the homeland of the Métis Nation.
Great LEXpectations RSS Feed