Andrew John Bala

The applicant father brought a motion for primary residence and sole decision-making of the parties' twin children.

The respondent mother had a history of making false allegations of sexual abuse against the father, engaging in severe alienating behaviours, and unilaterally moving the children out of the jurisdiction in breach of a court order.

Relying on a section 30 parenting assessment that identified severe alienation and recommended a custody reversal, the court found a material change in circumstances.

The court granted the father interim sole decision-making and primary residence, and ordered that the mother have no contact with the children for 90 days, followed by supervised parenting time, to allow the children to reintegrate into the father's care.

This urgent motion concerned a parenting dispute over parenting time and decision-making for two children.

The respondent father sought increased parenting time, alleging the applicant mother was unjustifiably denying it.

The mother filed an affidavit that the court found to be non-compliant with evidentiary rules, mixing facts, opinions, and submissions.

The court granted the father interim parenting time and struck the mother's affidavit, emphasizing the importance of proper affidavit evidence in family law proceedings.

The father was also granted costs.

The moving party requested an urgent Case Conference but filed a 16-page, single-spaced brief with improper attachments, breaching the Practice Direction.

The court refused to proceed with the conference on the documents filed, emphasizing that counsel must follow the Rules and Practice Directions and that chronic inattention to them is unacceptable.

The matter was adjourned to allow for the filing of corrected briefs.

An estate trustee sought to strike out a beneficiary's notice of objection to accounts on the grounds that the objections were barred by the two-year limitation period under the Limitations Act, 2002.

The court held that a notice of objection to accounts filed in response to an estate trustee's application to pass accounts does not commence a proceeding within the meaning of the Limitations Act and therefore is not subject to the basic two-year limitation period.

The court dismissed the appeal and ordered the estate trustee to pay costs personally, finding his motion to strike was unreasonable and designed to delay the passing of accounts hearing.