Evelyn Kohn Rayson

The appellant appealed a trial judgment ordering her to pay her proportionate share of post-secondary tuition fees for her adult son under section 7 of the Child Support Guidelines.

The appellant argued the son had withdrawn from parental control and was no longer a dependent child.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual determination that the son remained a child of the marriage under the Divorce Act while pursuing his education.

The appellant appealed a decision finding that he had repudiated an accepted offer to settle a family law dispute.

The appellant argued that his proposed separation agreement did not contain important changes or additions to the accepted offer.

The Court of Appeal disagreed, finding that the appellant's proposal to transfer control of the matrimonial home and another property to himself without specifying trust terms or time limitations was a fundamental alteration.

The court upheld the motion judge's application of the doctrine of repudiation and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant appealed a judgment granting an order pursuant to s. 50(3) of the Arbitration Act enforcing a family arbitration award.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error by the motion judge as all conditions in s. 50(3) were satisfied.

The Court noted that the appellant's arguments focused on the merits of the award, which is a matter for judicial review, and that the arbitrator had jurisdiction under the separation agreement.

The applicant mother moved to set aside a Registrar's order dismissing her application for judicial review of an arbitration award for delay.

The arbitration award concerned custody and access to the parties' child following allegations of sexual abuse against the father.

The court noted that the applicant had also appealed a Superior Court order incorporating the arbitration award, and that appeal was scheduled to be heard by the Court of Appeal.

Finding that the issues raised in the judicial review would be expeditiously dealt with by the Court of Appeal, the court dismissed the motion to set aside the Registrar's order without prejudice to renew it after the Court of Appeal's decision.