2 total
The court ordered a child's residence returned to Wallaceburg after the mother unilaterally relocated to London.
This is a motion to change brought by the father seeking to restore the child's primary residence to Wallaceburg after the mother unilaterally relocated with the child to London.
The court found that the mother's relocation constituted a material change in circumstances.
Despite the mother being the primary caregiver, the court determined that the relocation was not in the child's best interests, primarily due to the significant disruption to the child's established community, school, extracurricular activities, and frequent contact with the father and extended family.
The court emphasized that unilateral actions creating a new status quo are not condoned and ordered the child's residence to be restored to Wallaceburg, outlining parenting schedules depending on whether the mother returns to Wallaceburg or remains in London.
Spousal support increased due to payor's higher US income; retroactive support limited to date of notice.
The applicant sought to vary spousal support payable under a 2012 separation agreement, claiming retroactive and prospective increases due to the respondent's significantly higher post-separation income earned in the United States.
The court found a material change in circumstances and increased prospective spousal support to $10,500 CAD per month, calculating the non-resident respondent's income as if he were a Canadian resident.
The court awarded retroactive support back to January 2016, the date of effective notice, but declined to award support back to the date of separation, finding no wrongful conduct by the respondent.
The applicant's claim for security for support was dismissed.
