2 total
The court dismissed a motion to transfer a shared custody proceeding, finding neither jurisdiction offered substantial convenience.
The respondent brought a motion to transfer family law proceedings from Brampton to Stratford.
The applicant sought custody of the parties' child, born in 2008, and the parties had been sharing custody on a week-to-week basis since their separation in 2009.
The child had connections to both jurisdictions: the applicant resided in the Peel Region (Oakville/Mississauga) for approximately three years, while the respondent resided in the Stratford area for approximately one year and ten months.
The court dismissed the motion to transfer, finding that neither jurisdiction offered substantial convenience and that maintaining the case in Brampton was in the best interests of the child and parties, considering factors such as legal representation continuity, the child's connections to Peel Region (physician, dentist, daycare), and financial burden on the applicant.
The court granted the father supervised community access and permitted the children to attend his wedding.
The applicant sought to establish access to his two children following a case conference.
The parties reached a consent agreement for supervised access on alternate Sundays.
The court addressed several contested issues including the location of supervision (community-based versus access centre), random drug and alcohol testing, parenting courses, mental health counselling, police checks, and the children's attendance at the applicant's wedding.
The court granted most of the applicant's requests while imposing conditions designed to protect the children's welfare and address the respondent's concerns regarding the applicant's past mental health and substance use issues.
