The respondent mother brought a motion to change access arrangements made in 2001, seeking to eliminate or severely restrict the applicant father's access to their son.
The child, initially willing to attend access, began refusing visits in 2009.
The court found that both parents contributed to the deterioration of the father-child relationship through poor decision-making.
The mother was found to have been passive in encouraging access and to have subtly discouraged the relationship, while the father was found to have been rigid, critical, and insensitive to the child's preferences.
The court rejected the mother's position that the child should have unfettered discretion over access and instead imposed a structured access schedule with mandatory counselling for all parties.
