David M. Sherman

The applicant mother brought an urgent motion seeking to retain the parties' seven-year-old daughter in Whitehorse, Yukon, after a March break visit, contrary to a prior consent agreement that stipulated the child's return to the respondent father in Hamilton, Ontario.

The mother argued for the child to finish the school year in Whitehorse due to alleged disruptions at the father's residence and perceived advantages for the child.

The respondent father opposed, emphasizing the child's stability and well-being in Hamilton and the disruptive nature of the proposed change.

The court dismissed the mother's motion, reaffirming the principle that the status quo in parenting disputes should not be disrupted without urgent need and upholding the consent agreement.

This is a costs endorsement following a Court of Appeal decision that allowed an appeal in part.

The appellant sought costs in the court below on a partial indemnity basis up to the date of its offer to settle, and on a substantial indemnity basis thereafter.

The Court of Appeal rejected the appellant's reliance on an offer to settle made in the context of its own application, which had been dismissed.

The court found the result on appeal was mixed and awarded costs to the appellant in the amount of $28,565.99, the same amount originally awarded to the respondent in the court below.