In a family law motion concerning custody and relocation, the responding party sought primary residence of the children, restrictions on relocation, counselling orders, and a reduction in child support.
The moving party attempted to rely on a “reporting letter” authored by a parenting coordinator as evidence.
The court ruled the document inadmissible because it did not comply with the requirements for expert reports under the Family Law Rules, relied extensively on hearsay, and contained opinions outside the coordinator’s qualifications, including comments on mental health.
The court also held that parenting coordinators should not perform investigative or evidentiary roles and should limit their involvement to facilitating implementation of an existing parenting plan.
Without the report, the evidence did not support the father’s motion and the relocation was permitted.
