Dana Rogers is a family lawyer with significant experience in high-conflict family law disputes. She has conducted numerous trials before the Supreme Court of British Columbia and is known for her strategic approach, meticulous preparation, and unwavering commitment to achieving the best possible outcome for her clients.
Dana understands that separation and family conflict can be emotionally and financially overwhelming. She provides practical, honest advice while developing tailored legal strategies that protect her clients' interests both inside and outside the courtroom. Whether a matter can be resolved through negotiation or requires litigation, Dana is committed to guiding her clients with confidence, clarity, and determination.
While her practice is focused primarily on family law, Dana also acts in select estate litigation and civil litigation matters where her trial experience, negotiation skills, and strategic judgment are well suited to resolving complex disputes.
Outside of her legal practice, Dana enjoys pilates, meditation, exploring the Okanagan, and relaxing at home with her partner, Rob, and their cats, Leo and Bella.
Practice Areas
Education and Qualifications
- >Called to the BC Bar, 2020
- >Bachelor of Laws (First Class Honours), University of Sussex, 2018
- >Bachelor of Arts (Criminology), Kwantlen Polytechnic University, 2015
Representative Work
Acted for the respondent husband in a Supreme Court trial concerning property division and spousal support after a 10-year spousal relationship. The Court confirmed funds in the respondent's investment accounts as excluded property, along with $300,000 in pre-relationship home sale proceeds, and ordered equal division of true family property only. Spousal support was set at the low range of the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines for a fixed five-year period, with the option of paying it as a lump sum: Mohabir v. Mohabir, 2025 BCSC 1839
Acted for the claimant wife in a Supreme Court summary trial involving divorce and property division following a 25-year abusive relationship. Successfully obtained a reapportionment of 80% of the family property and 65% of the claimant's pension in her favour. The Court accepted that the respondent's prolonged unemployment, failure to contribute financially, and coercive conduct throughout the relationship justified a significant departure from equal division of family property: Chand v Shannon, 2025 BCSC 630
Represented the claimant husband in a 5-day Supreme Court trial dealing with the division of family property and family debt. Successfully contested the respondent's claim that the parties had an oral agreement to keep their assets separate save and except where they expressly merged them. The Court ordered the equalization of all family property, and the respondent's extra-provincial military pension is to be divided equally at source for the period of cohabitation: Powell v. Stalker, 2024 BCSC 1496
Represented the respondent mother in a 5-day Provincial Court trial involving parenting time, decision-making, school placement, and safety concerns. The Court confirmed joint guardianship and parental responsibilities, restored an equal parenting schedule, and ordered that the children remain enrolled in their Port Moody school to support stability. Written-only communication was directed between the parties, and contact between the children and the respondent's former partner was prohibited for safety reasons: unreported decision (2024)
Acted for the claimant mother in an 8-day Supreme Court trial dealing with international child relocation. Obtained an order allowing the claimant to relocate to Brisbane, Australia with her 2-year-old daughter: Hull v Kornilov, 2022 BCSC 898
Two years after the above relocation trial, ran a 2-day summary trial of the same case, and successfully obtained retroactive and ongoing child support for the claimant. The respondent's application to reduce child support payments to zero on the basis of undue hardship was dismissed with costs payable to the claimant: Hull v. Kornilov, 2024 BCSC 82
Successfully prevented the claimant wife from obtaining an interim distribution of family property under s. 89 of the Family Law Act in respect of real property owned solely by the respondent husband's mother: Jin v Zhang, 2022 BCSC 2152
Acted as co-counsel during a 6-day breach of trust trial in the Supreme Court of British Columbia: Pomozon v Beausoleil, 2020 BCSC 2084
Acted as co-counsel during a 7-day estate litigation trial dealing with contested spousal status in the Supreme Court of British Columbia: Jones v Davidson, 2020 BCSC 1371
Further published decisions and involvement
- >Jin v Zhang, 2023 BCSC 1585
- >G.D. v. South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority, 2024 BCCA 252 (junior counsel)
- >C.K. v. BetterHelp, Inc., 2024 BCCA 46 (junior counsel)
- >C.K. v. BetterHelp, Inc., 2023 BCSC 1666 (junior counsel)
- >Feng v Antifaev, 2020 BCSC 83 (articled student)
- >Yung v Three Good Friends Property Holdings Inc., 2018 BCSC 1963 (summer student)
Ready to talk?
Book a Free 30-Minute Initial Family Law Consultation