Braveena Vinasithamby

The court issued supplementary reasons to its prior decision, addressing the applicant's request to strike certain paragraphs from the respondent's affidavit.

The paragraphs in question disclosed information from a Case Conference, which is confidential.

The court affirmed that the confidentiality principles applicable to Settlement Conferences under Rule 17(23) of the Family Law Rules also apply to Case Conferences.

Consequently, specific paragraphs and an exhibit from the respondent's affidavit were ordered to be struck out.

The respondent mother brought a motion seeking various relief despite a prior order barring her from doing so until she demonstrated compliance with existing court orders.

The court reviewed three areas of alleged non-compliance, including providing website access, arranging joint counselling for the children, and facilitating FaceTime access with the applicant father.

Finding the respondent remained in non-compliance on all three fronts, the court dismissed her motion and awarded the applicant $3,000 in costs on a full-indemnity basis.