Stephen Cross

The moving party father brought a motion to change a final parenting order, and the responding party mother sought to vary the order to permit her to relocate the two children to Dubai.

The parties had a shared parenting arrangement with equal parenting time.

The court found a material change in circumstances but denied the mother's request to relocate the children.

Applying the Barendregt factors and the Divorce Act, the court concluded the mother failed to prove the move was in the children's best interests, noting her true motivation was to end the children's relationship with their father and that she had unduly influenced the children's stated preferences.

This judgment addresses outstanding issues from a long-standing family law application, including equalization of net family property, retroactive and ongoing child support, and decision-making authority for the parties' three daughters.

The court found no equalization payment was owed as both parties' net family property was zero at separation, but ordered the Father to reimburse the Mother $60,000 for post-separation adjustments.

The Father's income was imputed at $55,000 for 2012-2017 due to intentional under-employment, resulting in $92,498.47 in retroactive child support arrears.

For parenting, the Mother retained major decision-making authority but was ordered to consult the Father and list him as a secondary emergency contact, acknowledging his significant parenting time and abilities, while denying joint decision-making due to communication issues.

The Mother was awarded costs.

The applicant father moved for increased parenting time with the parties' two-year-old child.

The respondent mother opposed the motion, arguing that the current schedule should remain in place until the Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) completed its investigation.

The court noted concerns regarding family violence, including evidence that the applicant had caused a black eye to his older daughter from a previous relationship.

The court dismissed the motion for increased parenting time and adjourned the matter to allow for the completion of the OCL report.

The respondent mother brought a motion seeking 23 heads of relief, primarily alleging that the applicant father breached the parenting time and therapy provisions of their Minutes of Settlement regarding their two adult children with disabilities.

The father brought a cross-motion to strike the mother's affidavit evidence under Rule 1(8.2) of the Family Law Rules, arguing it was inflammatory and irrelevant.

The court found that the father had not done enough to facilitate the parenting schedule for the younger child and ordered him to take specific affirmative steps to ensure compliance and support reunification therapy.

The father's motion to strike was dismissed as moot, as the impugned forms are presumptively inadmissible at trial.

The father appealed a final family arbitration award that resolved parenting, child support, spousal support, and property issues.

He alleged procedural unfairness, bias, and errors in the arbitrator's parenting and financial decisions.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding no errors of law or palpable and overriding errors of fact.

The court held that the arbitrator's decisions, including imputing income due to the father's non-disclosure and awarding primary residence to the mother, were amply supported by the evidence and entitled to significant deference.

The Applicant Father and Respondent Mother were married for over fourteen years and had one child.

An eleven-day trial addressed custody, access, child support, spousal support, equalization, and a restraining order.

The Mother exhibited hostile and belligerent behavior, including criminal harassment, which negatively impacted the child.

The court granted sole custody to the Father, with severely restricted and professionally managed access for the Mother, contingent on her addressing mental health issues.

The court also determined child support, awarded the Mother a lump sum spousal support payment, and an equalization payment, while making various post-separation adjustments.