Diane Susan Barker

The appellant, Mr. Rodriguez, appealed three temporary orders from the Ontario Court of Justice concerning child protection records disclosure and parenting time.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed all three appeals, affirming the lower court's decisions.

The court applied a deferential standard of review for temporary orders, emphasizing that such orders should only be interfered with if clearly wrong or exceeding the reasonable ambit of solutions.

The court also awarded costs against the appellant due to the lack of merit and the unreasonable litigation behaviour.

The applicant sought vacant possession of his property from the respondent, his common-law spouse, who opposed the motion and sought interim spousal support, arguing their cohabitation agreement was void or unenforceable.

The court found a triable issue regarding the agreement's enforceability and the respondent's prima facie entitlement to support based on need.

The court ordered the respondent to vacate the property by a specific date and ordered the applicant to pay a lump sum towards past spousal support and ongoing monthly interim spousal support.

The court ruled that a child who is an access holder under Part V of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, is not limited to seeking an openness order only with persons explicitly named in an existing access order.

Instead, such a child may seek openness with any person with whom they have a beneficial and meaningful relationship, provided it is in the child's best interests.

This interpretation aligns with the plain language and purposeful approach of the CYFSA, as well as Canada's obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Office of the Children's Lawyer's argument on jurisdiction for inter-sibling openness was affirmed.