David Tobin

The applicant father brought a motion to change a child support order, seeking termination and repayment of support after the child's residency changed to his care.

The respondent mother initially resisted, proposing only a temporary suspension and later adding a no-costs term to an offer.

The court found the mother's conduct unreasonable, noting her continued acceptance of support despite the child's changed residency and her delay in accepting a reasonable offer.

The court ordered the temporary suspension of the child support order, granted the mother an extension to file pleadings, and awarded costs of $2,000 to the father, enforceable as a support order, due to the mother's behavior.

The applicant father brought a motion for a case conference to address the termination of a child support order, following a change in custody where the child was placed in his care.

The respondent mother had refused to consent to the termination.

The court granted the motion for a case conference, providing specific directions for its scheduling and conduct, and indicated that the mother should be prepared to address a suspension of the support order pending a final determination.

Following a family law trial regarding the equalization of net family properties, the applicant sought costs on a full or substantial indemnity basis.

The respondent argued the costs sought were excessive and that certain pre-trial steps should not be included.

The court reviewed the parties' offers to settle and found the applicant beat her November 2018 offer.

The court awarded the applicant partial indemnity costs for the period prior to the offer and full indemnity costs thereafter, fixing the total costs award at $32,732.72.

The parties resolved all issues except the equalization of their net family properties, specifically the valuation of their respective federal public service pensions.

The court determined that the applicant's pension value must include all pensionable service for which she elected to repay contributions for leaves without pay.

The court also found that the applicant's survivor benefit should not be included in her net family property as it would be lost upon divorce.

For the respondent's pension, the court used age 60 as the reasonable retirement age based on his pre-separation intentions and declined to deduct a contingent survivor benefit.

The respondent was ordered to pay an equalization payment of $563,560.23 with pre-judgment interest.

The maternal grandparents sought temporary custody of their three-year-old grandson following concerns about the mother's mental health and substance abuse issues.

The mother opposed the custody order and sought to set it aside, requesting temporary custody of the child herself.

The father supported the mother's position but sought joint custody.

The court dismissed the mother's motion to set aside the temporary custody order and her request for temporary custody, finding that while the mother had made positive developments since the initial ex parte order, concerns about her mental health and ongoing substance use remained unresolved.

The court expanded parental access, granted the grandparents permission to travel with the child to Florida, and ordered interim disbursements to fund the mother's legal representation.

The Children's Aid Society appealed an order of the Superior Court of Justice that set aside a Crown wardship declaration and directed the matter proceed to trial.

The Court of Appeal determined that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the Superior Court order was interlocutory, not final.

An order directing that a matter proceed to trial, even when it sets aside a prior final order, does not itself constitute a final order for appellate jurisdiction purposes.

The appeal was quashed, and the matter was directed to proceed to trial.