Dr. Rowe

The applicant father brought a motion for primary residence and sole decision-making of the parties' twin children.

The respondent mother had a history of making false allegations of sexual abuse against the father, engaging in severe alienating behaviours, and unilaterally moving the children out of the jurisdiction in breach of a court order.

Relying on a section 30 parenting assessment that identified severe alienation and recommended a custody reversal, the court found a material change in circumstances.

The court granted the father interim sole decision-making and primary residence, and ordered that the mother have no contact with the children for 90 days, followed by supervised parenting time, to allow the children to reintegrate into the father's care.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including attendant care benefits, meal preparation and delivery services, a visual skills assessment, and nutrition counselling.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application in its entirety.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's occupational therapy assessment over the applicant's regarding attendant care, finding the applicant could safely feed herself.

The Tribunal also held that the cost of food and nutritional supplements are not payable as medical or rehabilitation benefits under the Schedule, and that meal preparation is exclusively an attendant care benefit.

Claims for a visual skills assessment and further nutrition counselling were also dismissed as not reasonable or necessary.

The applicant was involved in a severe motor vehicle accident resulting in catastrophic impairment, including a brain injury.

He sought attendant care benefits and housekeeping and home maintenance benefits, which the respondent insurer denied.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the applicant was physically capable of performing tasks, his brain injury caused significant emotional and motivational limitations.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant was entitled to attendant care benefits for comfort, safety, and security, calculated at 240 minutes per week, as well as housekeeping and home maintenance benefits of $100 per week, plus interest on overdue amounts.

The applicant, an Indigenous person with a history of trauma and mental health challenges, sought a review of a detention order.

The reviewing judge found the Justice of the Peace committed an error of law by failing to apply Gladue principles.

Additionally, the applicant's recent acquisition of stable, supportive housing constituted a material change in circumstances.

The court concluded that the secondary ground concerns could be addressed through the wraparound supports and housing now available, and ordered the applicant's release on their own recognizance with Bail Program supervision.

The plaintiffs brought a civil action for damages after the defendant’s dogs attacked and bit one of the plaintiffs while the couple was walking their dog.

The action proceeded as an undefended trial after the defendant failed to file a statement of defence.

The court accepted the plaintiffs’ evidence and found liability established.

Damages were assessed for general damages, loss of income, future scar revision surgery, and out‑of‑pocket expenses, as well as housekeeping and a derivative claim under s. 60 of the Family Law Act.

Judgment was granted for a total of $61,559.40 including costs and pre‑judgment interest.