2 total
The court enforced an existing parenting order during the COVID-19 pandemic, finding that a blended family across two residences can constitute a single household.
The applicant brought an urgent motion for the immediate return of the parties' four children, alleging the respondent withheld them contrary to an existing consent order.
The respondent sought to impose a condition prohibiting the children from having contact with the applicant's current partner's children due to COVID-19 health concerns.
The court found that the respondent failed to demonstrate an increased health risk and that the applicant's blended family, despite maintaining separate residences, could constitute a "household" for public health guideline purposes.
The motion was granted, enforcing the original parenting schedule without the additional condition sought by the respondent.
Accident benefits claims dismissed where medical evidence showed ongoing symptoms were related to pre-existing conditions.
The applicant was injured when the TTC bus she was riding stopped suddenly.
She claimed ongoing income replacement benefits, medical benefits for physiotherapy and massage, and rehabilitation benefits for increased auto insurance premiums.
The insurer argued the claim was time-barred.
The arbitrator found the claim was not time-barred because the insurer's termination letters did not constitute a valid refusal under the Smith v. Co-operators standard.
However, on the merits, the arbitrator dismissed all claims.
Medical evidence, including from the applicant's own treating practitioners, indicated her ongoing symptoms were related to pre-existing chronic conditions rather than the accident, and she did not suffer a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment.
