B. Thomas Granger Q.C.

The applicant sought to set aside a cohabitation agreement signed prior to marriage that waived spousal support and equalization, and alternatively sought spousal support despite the agreement.

The court found the agreement was valid and binding, dismissing claims of duress, unconscionability, and material non-disclosure.

However, applying the Miglin framework, the court awarded the applicant a $250,000 lump sum in spousal support, finding that her unexpected severe health issues and resulting inability to work constituted a significant change in circumstances that made strict enforcement of the support waiver non-compliant with the objectives of the Divorce Act.

The respondent father brought a motion to resume unsupervised access to his daughter after completing a six-month period of supervised access, which had been agreed upon following unfounded allegations of sexual abuse.

The applicant mother opposed the resumption of unsupervised access and attempted to introduce new evidence to relitigate the issue.

The court found that the respondent was generally successful on the motion and awarded him costs.

Applying the principles of costs under the Family Law Rules and the Courts of Justice Act, the court ordered the applicant to pay the respondent $2,500 in costs.