Blake R. Lyngseth

The applicant mother brought an urgent motion seeking to resume the equal parenting schedule set out in the parties' separation agreement, alleging the respondent mother was withholding the children and alienating them.

The children had refused to return to the applicant's home following the introduction of her new partner and an alleged physical incident.

The court declined to hear the motion on an urgent basis, finding no evidence of alienation by the respondent, who had encouraged the children and proposed mediation.

The court held that the applicant should have exhausted reasonable avenues for resolution, such as mediation or meeting with the children, before resorting to urgent litigation during the pandemic.

The applicant sought an order for the immediate sale of the jointly owned matrimonial home and an amendment to her application to reference the Partition Act.

The respondent opposed the sale, arguing prejudice if sold before trial, and sought medical disclosure and an independent medical examination of the applicant.

The court granted the amendment and some medical disclosure by consent, and ordered the applicant to provide hospital records.

However, the applicant's motion for the immediate sale of the matrimonial home was denied, and the respondent's request for an independent medical examination was dismissed.

The court found that the trial was imminent, the applicant's financial hardship was not sufficiently proven, and the fair market value of the home was in dispute, making a pre-trial sale prejudicial to the respondent.

This trial addressed the income of the self-employed applicant, child support, retroactive child support, and spousal support.

The court preferred the applicant's expert opinion on income, with a minor adjustment for an unreasonable rental loss deduction.

The respondent's claim of under-employment was rejected.

Retroactive child support was ordered from July 1, 2012, and ongoing child support was set using the set-off method.

The applicant was found entitled to compensatory and needs-based spousal support, with ongoing monthly payments ordered from January 1, 2018.

However, the claim for retroactive spousal support was dismissed due to concerns about hardship to the payor and the applicant's delay in providing reliable income evidence.

The applicants, paternal grandparents, brought a motion for disclosure of a suicide note written by their deceased son (the children's father) to the respondent mother.

They argued the note might reveal dynamics between the parents or the mother's state of mind, which they believed was relevant to their application for grandparent access.

The court reviewed the letter in camera and determined it was not relevant to the central issue of whether grandparent access was in the best interests of the children.

The motion for disclosure was dismissed.

The respondent father was largely successful on a motion to change to terminate child support for two adult daughters.

He sought costs of $9,628.79 on a full indemnity basis.

The applicant mother opposed, arguing the father's conduct was unreasonable and noting the financial impact on the remaining minor child.

The court applied Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules, found the father's conduct did not amount to bad faith, and awarded him costs of $8,608.04 inclusive of disbursements and HST.

On a family law motion, the respondent spouse sought interim and retroactive spousal support while the applicant spouse brought a cross-motion to sever the divorce claim from remaining issues.

The court considered the parties’ financial circumstances, including disability income received by the payor and the recipient’s reliance on social assistance and limited earning capacity following years of supporting the family during military postings.

The court declined to treat the payor’s voluntary financial assistance to adult children in university as section 7 expenses reducing ability to pay.

Interim spousal support was ordered along with partial retroactive support.

The divorce claim was severed to permit it to proceed independently.