Debra Paulseth

The applicant mother brought a motion to change a 2002 court order, seeking retroactive child support and special expenses for the child, K, from the respondent father.

The father had failed to provide annual financial disclosure as required by the original order and had largely been out of contact.

The court found the father's conduct blameworthy, rejecting his arguments of delay by the mother or the child's withdrawal from parental control.

The court ordered retroactive child support based on the father's income from July 1, 2010, until January 31, 2019, and an equal sharing of post-secondary tuition and health-related expenses.

The existing order for daycare contribution was terminated as of September 1, 2008.

Father sought the return of a child to Germany under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, claiming wrongful retention by the mother in Canada.

The mother raised the Article 13(b) defence, alleging grave risk of harm to the child based on a pattern of domestic violence, coercive control, and isolation by the father.

The court found the mother credible and established a constellation of factors including physical and emotional abuse of the mother, emotional abuse of the child, control and isolation, and the insulated nature of the Syrian community in Germany.

The court concluded there was grave risk of ongoing physiological and psychological harm if the child were returned and dismissed the father's application.

This is a status review application under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 concerning two young children who were brought into the care of the Children's Aid Society of Toronto in August 2018 due to parental substance abuse, domestic violence, and risk of harm.

The mother proposed placing the children with former foster parents under a supervision order.

The court found that the children remain in need of protection and that the former foster parents' plan was not in the children's best interests due to credibility concerns, undisclosed health issues, and the foster mother's failure to address the children's developmental needs.

The court ordered extended society care with monthly access to the mother and no access to the father.

In this motion to change child support, the father sought to modify the existing support order following a change in custody whereby the child moved to his home full-time in April 2018.

The parties disputed the father's income for 2018 and the mother's income, as well as which special expenses should be shared.

The court determined the father's income at $194,663.61 based on actual T4 income and the mother's income at $44,982.98 after accepting her business expense deductions with appropriate adjustments.

The court exercised discretion to defer the mother's contribution to special expenses until 2019 to avoid an unjustified windfall to the father, given the timing of the custody change relative to his increased income.

A status review application under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act concerning a child found in need of protection.

The Catholic Children's Aid Society sought a final order of extended society care without access to the mother to facilitate adoption.

The mother sought return of the child under a supervision order or, alternatively, access.

The court found that the mother repeatedly breached supervision orders by maintaining contact with her biological father, a registered sex offender with a history of child sexual abuse.

Despite opportunities to address the risk through counselling and support services, the mother demonstrated poor judgment, lack of credibility, and inability to comply with court-ordered conditions.

The court granted extended society care but permitted limited access through cards and letters with the child as the access holder.

A child protection application brought by the Children's Aid Society of Toronto seeking a finding that a child is in need of protection due to risk of sexual abuse or exploitation.

The respondent mother acted as surety for her brother, who was charged with multiple counts of luring, sexual exploitation, and child pornography involving teenage female students.

The court found the child to be in need of protection based on the mother's failure to recognize or protect against the risk posed by the maternal uncle, despite overwhelming evidence of his predatory conduct.

The court made a finding of need for protection but declined to make a further order, noting that the maternal uncle's incarceration had ameliorated the imminent risk.

A costs endorsement following a focused hearing on the issue of additional overnight access to the father on alternate weekends in a family law matter.

The applicant (mother) sought costs of $21,140.47 on a full recovery basis after being successful in opposing the respondent's (father's) request for additional overnight access.

The court awarded costs of $17,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST, finding that the mother was reasonable, child-focused, and completely successful, while the father failed to serve any offers to settle and provided minimal evidentiary support for his position.

This is a costs decision in a child protection proceeding under the Child and Family Services Act.

The Children's Aid Society sought a finding in need of protection for two children based on exposure to high-conflict parental separation and the father's refusal to consent to recommended medical treatment.

The mother sought costs against the father, alleging bad faith and unreasonable conduct that prolonged the proceedings over six court appearances spanning several months.

The court found the father's conduct to be persistently and extraordinarily unreasonable, including filing excessive and irrelevant affidavit material, maintaining a meritless legal argument, failing to attend trial management conferences, and using access negotiations as leverage in the costs dispute.

The court awarded costs to the mother on a partial indemnity basis.

A child protection status review application brought by the Children's Aid Society of Toronto seeking final custody of three children to the mother with restricted access to the father and a restraining order.

The court granted summary judgment on the motion, finding that the father's conduct had not changed since the previous order, that he continued to engage in harassment and threatening behaviour toward the mother and children, and that the children's best interests were served by sole custody to the mother with supervised access to the father.

The court also granted a restraining order against the father prohibiting direct or indirect contact with the mother and children except through a designated supervised access facility.

A child protection matter under Part III of the Child and Family Services Act involving a child (B-J) born in 2009 to a mother with a longstanding oxycontin addiction and a father with a history of incarceration.

The child was apprehended in September 2014 following allegations of domestic violence and placed with family friends (the F.).

A finding of need of protection was made in February 2015 based on domestic violence and drug use.

The mother was given multiple opportunities over nearly three years to comply with court-ordered conditions including drug treatment, counselling, and consistent access.

Despite these opportunities and various court orders, the mother repeatedly failed to maintain clean urine screens, attend counselling programs, and maintain consistent access with the child.

The mother also chose a new partner with a serious criminal record and active drug addiction.

The court found that the child's best interests required a Crown wardship order to provide permanency and stability, as the mother had demonstrated an inability to address the core risk factors of drug addiction and domestic violence exposure.

A child protection case involving a four-month-old infant who suffered severe traumatic head injuries including subdural hemorrhaging, retinal hemorrhages, and brain damage.

The child was hospitalized after the father called an ambulance on October 2, 2015.

The Children's Aid Society sought a finding that both children were in need of protection under the Child and Family Services Act.

The parents disputed the cause of injury, with the father's expert suggesting a chronic medical condition (subdural hygroma) with spontaneous rebleeding, while the Society's expert concluded the injuries resulted from traumatic head trauma inflicted or inadequately protected against by the parents.

The court accepted the Society's expert evidence and found both children in need of protection.

Mother brought a motion to change a 2007 Separation Agreement to increase child support retroactively to 2007, enforce special expenses for post-secondary education, and extend spousal support beyond the agreed termination date of December 31, 2017.

Father opposed the motion.

The court found material changes in circumstances, including father's income increase from $138,546 to over $152,000, mother's inability to obtain full-time employment due to medical conditions, and the children's post-secondary education expenses.

The court granted the motion in substantial part, ordering retroactive child support from January 1, 2013, ongoing child support at $2,044 per month, proportionate contributions to post-secondary expenses at 69.6% for father and 30.4% for mother, and indefinite spousal support at $2,200 per month commencing March 1, 2016.

This is a costs endorsement following a motion to change custody and access arrangements.

The mother was completely successful in obtaining sole custody of two children, with the father receiving limited supervised access and the paternal grandparents prohibited from direct contact with the children.

The father had sought sole decision-making authority over educational matters, while the mother cross-moved for sole custody.

The court awarded costs to the mother against both the father and paternal grandparents in the amount of $150,000, finding the mother's conduct reasonable throughout the proceedings and the father and paternal grandparents' conduct unreasonable, including making false allegations and coaching the children.

A motion to change a 2012 consent custody order in a high-conflict family law case.

The respondent/mother sought sole custody after the applicant/father refused to return the child to her primary residence following a temporary arrangement where she placed the child with him during her retraining period in 2012.

The applicant/father cross-moved for sole custody, alleging the mother was unstable and abusive.

The court found a material change in circumstances and, after extensive analysis of the best interests factors, awarded sole custody to the mother due to the father's unrelenting negative attitude toward the mother and the harmful effects of high-conflict parenting on the child.

The court structured access to minimize transitions and imposed strict communication protocols.