Krystal Dorian

Trial decision concerning custody, access, and child support for a child born in 2006 to unmarried parents who never cohabited.

The mother sought sole custody and retroactive child support from birth.

The father sought joint custody with an alternating weekly schedule as recommended by the Office of the Children's Lawyer.

The court found the mother was the primary caregiver and granted her sole custody, rejecting the Office of the Children's Lawyer's recommendation for joint custody based on the parties' inability to communicate and cooperate.

The court ordered the father to pay child support retroactive to the child's birth and rejected many of his claimed business expense deductions as illegitimate.

A custody trial concerning Jamie Suzanne Wilson, born September 29, 2008, whose parents separated in June 2010.

The applicant mother sought custody with the child residing in Oakville, while the respondent father sought custody with the child residing in Hamilton.

The court awarded joint custody with the child's principal residence in Hamilton with the father, with midweek access to the mother and every other weekend during the school year.

The decision considered the child's best interests under the Children's Law Reform Act, including emotional ties, family support systems, practical parenting arrangements, and school stability.

The applicant mother brought a motion to stay a trial judge's order that changed the primary residence of the child to the respondent father and required the child to attend school in Hamilton.

The trial judge had issued a handwritten endorsement without providing reasons for judgment.

The court found it had jurisdiction to hear the motion under subrule 38(35) of the Family Law Rules.

Applying the three-part test for a stay pending appeal, the court found a serious issue to be tried due to the lack of reasons and potential misapprehension of evidence, irreparable harm to the child if forced to change schools and primary caregivers abruptly, and that the balance of convenience favoured the mother.

The motion to stay was granted, returning the child to the mother's primary care and her previous school in Oakville pending the appeal.

The applicant mother brought a motion to stay an order of Justice Flaherty dated August 30, 2013, which changed the primary residence of the child from a shared parenting arrangement to the respondent father in Hamilton, reducing the mother's access to one evening per week and alternate weekends.

The mother alleged procedural unfairness due to the trial judge's hearing difficulties, misapprehension of evidence, and failure to give proper weight to the Office of the Children's Lawyer's recommendations.

The court granted the stay, finding a serious issue for appeal, irreparable harm to the child, and that the balance of convenience favored the child's return to her mother's primary care in Oakville pending the appeal.