Natasha was born and raised in Vancouver and attended law school at the University of Alberta. 

Natasha has practiced family law exclusively since she was called to the bar in British Columbia in 2011. 

Natasha has expertise in the negotiation, litigation, and resolution of all aspects of family law.  She has represented and advised clients regarding divorce, parenting issues, child and spousal support, division of family property and debt, separation agreements, cohabitation agreements, and marriage agreements. 

Natasha has a special passion for issues surrounding children, parenting issues and the welfare of children in general.  Natasha strongly believes that children deserve a voice in family law matters and that their views should be heard.

As counsel, Natasha has considerable experience inside the courtroom.  She has appeared before the Provincial Court of British Columbia and the Supreme Court of British Columbia many times whether through trial, chambers applications, judicial case conferences.

She is a fierce advocate for her clients in the courtroom but also understands the value in resolving matters outside of court.  Natasha is confident and unremitting in the energy behind her advocacy when she believes in a position, but is also able to empathize and understand the position of the other party. Natasha approaches her cases with the aim to treat clients and opposing parties with respect and for matters to be resolved in an amicable, timely and cost-effective manner.

Outside of work, Natasha enjoys hiking, traveling and spending time with family and friends.

Natasha is able to serve clients in Punjabi.

Associations/Certifications

• Law Society of BC - Member

• Family Law Mediator Certification

Published Cases

• R.C. v. R.W., 2019 BCPC 180

  Successfully argued for mother to have primary residence of children in line with children’s wishes

• Johnstone v Johnstone, 2018 BCSC 297

  Successfully argued for client to receive spousal support at the high-range of the SSAGs and for client to receive costs of the application.

• Dunn v Cashin, 2021 BCSC 1000

  Trial regarding parenting matters, child support, spousal support, and property division. Successful argument with respect to down payment losing excluded property status at the time family home was purchased.   

• Gallo v. Gallo, 2022 BCSC 1118

  Trial regarding property division, spousal support and income. Successfully argued for excluded property to be classified as family property

• Chatha v. Uppal, 2019 BCSC 2081

  Successfully argued for declaration that mother had wrongfully denied father parenting time. Successfully argued that mother be fined pursuant to Section 61(2) of the Family Law Act and that father receive costs of the application

• T.J.G. v. A.D.G., 2017 BCSC 1511

  Successfully argued that Hear the Child Report be completed. The Honourable Madam Justice Young at paragraph 38 of the Reasons for Judgement states “I see no reason to deny the children an opportunity to have their voices heard in this family law dispute.”