Brent Angelique Mendiola

On an interim family law motion, the moving party sought child support, spousal support, and interim costs under r. 24(25) of the Family Law Rules while jurisdiction was disputed in parallel Yemen proceedings.

The court imputed interim income to the responding party based on available U.S. tax evidence and ordered retroactive monthly child support and interim spousal support from July 1, 2025, but declined to order interim s. 7 expenses on the existing record.

The court rejected the argument that a unilateral Yemen talaq barred interim spousal support, citing Divorce Act threshold requirements and public policy concerns.

The court granted substantial interim costs to level the litigation playing field and stayed the jurisdiction motion until support arrears and interim costs were paid.

Costs of the motion were also awarded to the moving party.

The moving party sought leave to appeal an order transferring a matter from the Family Law Team to the Civil Law Team in Toronto.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding that while there was good reason to doubt the motion judge's finding on jurisdiction, the decision to have the matter addressed by the Civil Law Team was an exercise of administrative discretion that did not raise a matter of such importance to warrant leave to appeal.

The appellants appealed a motion judge's decision finding that the Superior Court of Justice had jurisdiction simpliciter over the respondent's action and that Ontario was not forum non conveniens.

The underlying action involved claims for breach of contract, negligence, and other torts arising from a share purchase agreement.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the motion judge's application of the Van Breda presumptive connecting factors for jurisdiction, and no basis to interfere with her discretionary decision regarding forum non conveniens.