Dennis Joseph Tobin

The applicant sought retroactive lump sum spousal support for 2015 to 2022 following a long common-law relationship and a nine-year post-separation informal support arrangement.

The court refused to permit the respondent to advance a new separation date at trial, found compensatory spousal support entitlement existed in principle, and accepted that the applicant had experienced intimate partner violence and economic disadvantage arising from the relationship.

However, the court held it could not determine quantum or duration because there was insufficient evidence about the parties' financial arrangements from 2006 to 2015 and because the applicant's evidence about her own post-2015 finances, property transfers, corporate dealings, and alleged loans was found unreliable, deceptive, and tax-avoidant.

Without reliable recipient income evidence, the court could not perform a proper SSAG analysis.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant father and respondent mother sought a determination on the primary residence and parenting time for their four-year-old child, who was about to commence school.

The parties lived four hours apart, making their previous week-about arrangement unworkable.

The court considered the factors under s. 24 of the Children's Law Reform Act, including the child's strong bonds with half-siblings in both households.

The court found that the father's plan better maintained the child's relationships with all siblings and provided more consistent daily care.

Primary residence was awarded to the father, with the mother receiving alternating weekends, holidays, and week-about parenting time during the summer.

The applicant mother brought a motion for temporary child and spousal support, seeking to impute an income of $250,005 to the respondent father, a pilot whose employment in Qatar was recently terminated.

Both parties claimed mental health issues impacting their ability to work.

The court declined to impute income to the respondent, finding insufficient evidence of intentional underemployment, and instead based child support on his new conditional employment salary of $74,285.

Temporary spousal support was dismissed as the parties' current incomes were similar, and section 7 expenses were ordered to be shared proportionately.