The Applicant mother and Respondent father each brought motions seeking various relief concerning custody, access, and support for their two young children.
A key preliminary issue was the admissibility of an expert report from the mother's psychotherapist, which the court found inadmissible due to lack of expertise and objectivity.
The court determined it was in the children's best interests for their primary residence to remain with the mother, but rejected the mother's request for supervised access, ordering unsupervised access for the father with escalating parenting time.
Interim child and spousal support payments were ordered, and the support motion was adjourned for further evidence.
