A. Valova

The applicant father sought unsupervised access and joint custody of his young son.

The respondent mother opposed, citing fears for her safety and alleging the father had anger and alcohol issues, and requested continued supervised access.

After a lengthy trial reviewing the parties' tumultuous relationship and the father's successful supervised visits, the court found no evidence the father posed a danger to the child.

The court ordered joint custody with divided final decision-making authority, a progressive schedule for unsupervised access, and mandated the use of Our Family Wizard for communication.

The plaintiffs brought a motion to enforce previous orders requiring the defendants to answer undertakings and questions taken under advisement from examinations for discovery.

The plaintiffs initially abandoned a request for a contempt finding but later sought to resurrect it based on new case law.

The court refused to allow the contempt motion to proceed, finding it unfair to the defendants, and noted that contempt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt regardless.

However, the court found the defendant's answers to undertakings were insufficient 'window dressing' and issued a 'last chance' order compelling proper answers and further attendance for discovery, warning that future non-compliance could result in pleadings being struck.

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment to enforce security granted by the defendant over her investment account for a loan advanced to a corporation operated by her brother.

The defendant argued she should not be liable because the plaintiff failed to ensure she received independent legal advice before pledging the security.

The court found the documentary record established the security was knowingly provided for the loan and that there was no genuine issue requiring a trial under Rule 20.04 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Distinguishing authorities involving vulnerable guarantors and unconscionable transactions, the court held no duty arose to ensure independent legal advice in the circumstances.

Summary judgment was granted and the investment account ordered liquidated to satisfy the debt.