3 total
Urgent parenting motions dismissed; court cautions against weaponizing a parent's stabilized mental health condition.
The respondent mother experienced a mental health crisis and was hospitalized, during which time the child stayed with the applicant father.
After the mother stabilized and was discharged, the father refused to return the child, engaging in self-help to establish a new status quo.
Both parties brought motions seeking urgent relief regarding parenting time and decision-making.
The court dismissed the requests for urgency, finding that the mother's mental health condition was stable, she was following her treatment plan, and a safety plan was in place.
The court emphasized that a parent's mental illness does not automatically justify limiting parenting time and cautioned against relying on stigma and stereotypes in family law proceedings.
Civil action stayed as an impermissible collateral attack on a freezing order made in family court.
The defendant moved to stay a civil action brought by the plaintiff, her former spouse, which sought to lift a freezing order and preservation order previously granted in their ongoing family law proceeding.
The court granted the stay, finding that the civil action was an impermissible collateral attack and barred by issue estoppel, as the plaintiff was attempting to relitigate a final order made between the same parties in another forum.
The defendant's request for security for costs was dismissed as unnecessary given the stay.
Travel agency licence revoked for repeated failures to comply with trust accounting and financial reporting requirements.
The appellant travel agency appealed a Notice of Proposal to revoke its registration under the Travel Industry Act, 2002.
The Registrar alleged a deteriorating pattern of non-compliance, including failures to meet financial reporting deadlines, maintain working capital, and comply with trust accounting regulations.
Despite multiple inspections and warnings, the appellant failed to rectify its trust accounting deficiencies and provide required reconciliations.
The Tribunal found that the appellant repeatedly contravened the Act, the Regulation, and its conditions of licensing.
The Tribunal ordered the Registrar to carry out the proposal to revoke the appellant's licence.