3 total
The court temporarily expanded the father's access while maintaining the mother's primary residence.
The applicant father sought an urgent temporary custody order for his son, Ethan, alleging the respondent mother had substance abuse issues and neglected the child, supported by an initial Children's Aid Society (CAS) letter.
The respondent mother denied the allegations and sought to maintain the existing consent order where she was the primary caregiver.
The court found insufficient evidence to support a complete change in custody or supervised access for the mother.
However, acknowledging the mother's current mental health distress and difficulties, the court issued a temporary order maintaining the mother as the primary resident parent but significantly expanded the father's access, with a plan for review upon Ethan's return to in-person schooling.
No costs were awarded.
The court dismissed a mother's motion to strike the father's pleadings for inadequate financial disclosure, allowing his motion to change child support to proceed.
The respondent father brought a motion to change a child support order from 2012 that imputed his income at $104,000 annually, requiring him to pay $911 per month.
The applicant mother moved to strike the father's pleadings due to his failure to comply with financial disclosure orders.
The court dismissed the motion to strike, finding that while the father's disclosure was inadequate, he had made some effort to comply and there was merit to his motion to change.
The court found that the original imputation of income was likely incorrect based on the calculation method used and that changed circumstances warranted a review of the order.
The matter was scheduled for a settlement conference and focused hearing.
The court granted temporary custody to the father and transferred the case after finding the mother's abuse allegations unsubstantiated.
The applicant mother sought temporary custody of the child with supervised access to the father, while the respondent father sought temporary custody with weekend access for the mother.
The father also brought a motion to transfer the case from Toronto to Peel.
The court found that the child had thrived in the father's primary care for several years and that the mother's allegations of abuse were not proven on a balance of probabilities.
The court granted temporary custody to the father, imposed strict conditions on the mother's access, and transferred the case to Peel where the child ordinarily resides.
