Breithaupt Smith

The parties, both self-represented, sought a determination on a regular parenting schedule, child support, and property division following their separation.

The mother proposed a schedule where the children reside primarily with her, while the father sought a schedule accommodating his demanding work hours.

The court adopted the mother's proposed schedule, finding it in the children's best interests, as the father's work commitments prevented regular overnight care.

The court also dismissed the father's claim of undue hardship regarding child support, finding his household standard of living was higher than the mother's.

Household contents were valued at one-third of their purchase price, and the mother was ordered to pay the father for his half-share.

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a final order to place the child in the care of the maternal grandmother for six months subject to supervision.

The mother had suffered a medical incident, struggled with substance abuse, and had not been in contact with the Society or her counsel for several months.

The father was noted in default.

Applying the test for summary judgment in child protection proceedings, the court found no genuine issue requiring a trial, determined the child remained in need of protection, and concluded that the requested supervision order was the least intrusive option in the child's best interests.

The mother sought permission to move the primary residence of the parties' eight-year-old child to Michigan to live with her fiancé.

The father opposed the move and brought a motion to change the existing parenting schedule to expand his parenting time and adjust child support.

The mother also sought a declaration that the father is a vexatious litigant.

The court found that the proposed move constituted a material change in circumstances but concluded that relocating to Michigan was not in the child's best interests, as it would disrupt the child's strong bonds with the father and extended family in Ontario.

The court dismissed the mother's request to relocate, dismissed the vexatious litigant claim, and adjusted the parenting schedule and section 7 expenses.

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a four-month Supervision Order placing the 17-year-old child with her father until her 18th birthday.

The mother opposed the motion, arguing the children should never have been removed from her care in 2006.

The court found no genuine issue requiring a trial, noting the mother's failure to address her mental health issues and the child's clear wish not to have contact with her mother.

The court admitted the child's views through the Society worker's affidavit under the Khan test and granted the Supervision Order.

The applicant father brought a Motion to Change seeking to eliminate child support arrears accumulated between August 2016 and August 2018, arguing he was unable to work due to severe wrist pain and subsequent surgeries.

The respondent mother argued he should have found comparable work.

The court found that while the father was technically intentionally underemployed, his underemployment was reasonably required by his health needs under section 19(1)(a) of the Federal Child Support Guidelines.

The court fixed the arrears at $0.00 but declined to order the mother to reimburse funds already collected by the Family Responsibility Office.

The applicant father brought a motion for civil contempt against the respondent mother, alleging six breaches of a final parenting order.

The court found the mother in contempt for failing to enroll the child in an extracurricular activity and for failing to cooperate in obtaining a passport for the child.

The other alleged breaches were dismissed due to ambiguity in the order or the court exercising its discretion.

The mother was ordered to pay a $57 fine for the passport application fee and to enroll the child in specific extracurricular programs.