Aristotle Lebedev

The applicant sought interim child and spousal support in Ontario, while the respondent sought recognition and enforcement of Chinese divorce judgments that addressed child support and property division but not spousal support.

The court found that the applicant had attorned to the Chinese jurisdiction by participating in the Chinese proceedings.

The court dismissed the applicant's public policy arguments against enforcing the Chinese judgments, including the lower child support amount and the absence of spousal support in Chinese law, finding that these did not "shock the moral conscience" of the Canadian court.

Consequently, the respondent's motion for summary judgment recognizing and enforcing the Chinese judgments was granted, and the applicant's motion for interim support was dismissed, as the Ontario court lacked jurisdiction over issues already adjudicated in China.

The applicant mother sought to strike out or stay the respondent father's amended motion to change a final order concerning custody, access, and a restraining order.

The mother argued the father failed to pay outstanding costs orders and that his motion was devoid of merit.

The court found the father had not complied with multiple court orders, including payment of costs and production of documents, and that his claims of a material change in circumstances were insincere and contradicted by his own statements.

The court ordered a stay of the father's motion to change, emphasizing that while striking pleadings in child-related matters is rare, it is appropriate when there is non-compliance and a lack of merit.