3 total
Sole custody and restraining order granted to mother; father's access limited to letters and gifts.
The applicant mother sought sole custody, no access for the respondent father, imputed income for child support, and a restraining order following a separation marked by allegations of domestic violence.
The father sought joint custody, unsupervised access, and rescission of child support arrears, claiming the mother had alienated the children.
The court found the father's evidence lacking credibility and noted his failure to cooperate with the Office of the Children's Lawyer.
Given the history of abuse and the children's refusal to see the father during supervised access attempts, the court granted sole custody to the mother and limited the father's access to sending letters and gifts.
The court also imputed income to the father at minimum wage due to intentional underemployment, ordered child support, refused to rescind arrears, and granted a restraining order against the father.
The court granted the applicant sole custody, denied respondent access, and imputed child support.
A family law application concerning custody, access, and child support following separation and criminal charges of assault and sexual assault.
The applicant mother sought sole custody with no access for the respondent father, while the respondent sought joint custody with unsupervised access.
The court found the father was physically, verbally, and emotionally abusive to both the mother and children.
Despite the father's acquittal in criminal proceedings, the civil standard of balance of probabilities supported findings of abuse.
The court granted sole custody to the mother, permitted the father to send letters, cards, and gifts only, and imputed income for child support purposes based on intentional underemployment.
The court dismissed the Society's application for Crown wardship, instead extending Society wardship to facilitate the infant's gradual return to her parents under a supervision order.
This is a child protection trial under the Child and Family Services Act involving an amended protection application brought by the Children's Aid Society of Toronto regarding a child (A.L.) born in 2010.
The child was apprehended on December 17, 2010, due to the mother's mental health crisis, suicidal ideation, domestic conflict within the parental relationship, and concerns about parental capacity.
The Society sought a Crown wardship order with no access to facilitate adoption.
The parents opposed the application and sought the child's return to their care.
The court found the child was in need of protection but determined that return to the parents with a supervision order was in the child's best interests, rejecting the Society's adoption plan.
The court applied section 70(4) of the CFSA to extend the time for Society wardship to facilitate a gradual transition home over four months.
