1 total
The court refused to suspend a father's access to his immunocompromised child during the COVID-19 pandemic, instead mandating strict safety protocols.
The applicant mother sought to suspend the respondent father's access to their medically fragile child for three weeks due to the child's unusually high risk from the Covid-19 virus.
The respondent father cross-moved to continue access.
The court found both parents had exposed the child to unnecessary risks and failed to make full disclosure.
Balancing the child's best interests, including the need for both parents' support during disorienting times, against the risks of Covid-19, the court dismissed the mother's motion and ordered that the existing access schedule continue with strict safety protocols for both parents and during transportation.
