2 total
Interim mobility motion to relocate children to the US during pandemic dismissed due to safety concerns.
The father brought an interim mobility motion seeking custody and permission to relocate with the two children from Windsor, Ontario to Virginia, USA, due to an employment transfer.
The mother opposed the motion, arguing the children should remain in Windsor due to the COVID-19 pandemic and her recent progress in addressing mental health and parenting issues.
The court applied the tests from Gordon v. Goertz and Plumley v. Plumley, finding that the proposed relocation during a pandemic raised significant unanswered safety and logistical concerns.
The court concluded that the father failed to demonstrate a strong probability of success at trial or compelling circumstances to justify disrupting the children's status quo on an interim basis.
The motion was dismissed, and the existing shared parenting arrangement was maintained.
Summary judgment granted on mortgage counterclaim; alleged encumbrances were not material misrepresentations.
The defendant brought a motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim arising from a mortgage given as security for the assignment of another mortgage.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant made misrepresentations about encumbrances on the underlying property and that the agreement did not reflect what was promised.
The court held that the alleged subsequent encumbrances did not materially affect the plaintiffs’ priority or interest, and therefore could not constitute actionable misrepresentations.
The court also found that the handwritten agreement and related oral representations merged into the registered mortgage and that the involvement of independent counsel defeated any non est factum argument.
Finding no genuine issue requiring a trial, the court granted summary judgment on the counterclaim.
