The applicant father brought an emergency motion seeking the immediate return of a one‑year‑old child from Alberta to Ontario, exclusive care and control of the child, and police enforcement under the Children’s Law Reform Act.
The child had travelled to Alberta with the respondent mother for a six‑week visit but remained there after the mother decided to relocate.
Although the court found the father had not consented to a permanent relocation and that the child’s habitual residence was originally Ontario, the father waited approximately eight months before bringing a motion to compel the child’s return.
The court held that the father’s delay constituted acquiescence, allowing a new status quo to develop in Alberta where the child had lived for most of her life.
Applying the best interests of the child and status quo principles, the court declined to disrupt the child’s settled circumstances.
