Andrea C. Cooley

The applicant was successful in a mobility trial permitting her to relocate with the parties' two children from London to Woodstock.

She sought costs of $8,857.71.

The respondent did not file costs submissions.

The court considered the factors under rule 24(12) of the Family Law Rules and the applicant's offers to settle.

The court noted that the respondent's refusal to agree to the move was not unreasonable simply because he was unsuccessful.

The court awarded the applicant costs of $3,500 inclusive of disbursements and HST.

The applicant sought to relocate with the two young children from London to Woodstock, Ontario.

The respondent, the children's father, opposed the move.

The court, applying the factors from *Gordon v. Goertz* and *Bjornson v. Creighton* under the *Children's Law Reform Act*, found that the relocation was in the children's best interests.

The applicant was the primary caregiver, and the move would improve her employability and financial security, as well as provide her with emotional and psychological support from her family in Woodstock.

The court granted the relocation, with adjustments to transportation costs and access times to accommodate the respondent.