Serious family violence justified sole decision-making, supervised access, support, and restraint.
Following a family trial concerning divorce, parenting, child support, spousal support, and restraining relief, the court found that the respondent had committed serious family violence, including intimate partner violence, abusive discipline of the child, coercive and controlling behaviour, and direct exposure of the child to severe violence.
Applying the best-interests framework under the Divorce Act, with primary emphasis on the child's physical, emotional, and psychological safety, security and well-being, the court granted the applicant sole decision-making responsibility and primary residence, and limited the respondent to supervised parenting time in an access centre and specified video contact.
The court imputed income to the respondent for child support purposes because of incomplete disclosure, awarded retroactive and ongoing child support plus proportionate section 7 expenses, and dismissed the respondent's spousal support claim.
A final restraining order was also granted based on objectively reasonable safety concerns.
