The respondent brought an urgent motion seeking custody of the parties' 14-year-old son and a comprehensive case review, alleging the applicant failed to follow COVID-19 guidelines and that a prior review was not held.
The respondent also made conspiracy allegations.
The applicant sought dismissal, highlighting the respondent's prior designation as a vexatious litigant and the denial of leave for a similar custody motion in April 2020.
The court denied leave to the respondent's motion and struck it under Family Law Rules 1(8) and 1(8.2), finding it to be an abuse of process.
The court noted the motion was almost identical to a previously denied one, new allegations were unsubstantiated, the respondent failed to meet conditions for parenting time resumption, and conspiracy theories had been previously rejected.
