George Karahotzitis

In an uncontested trial, the applicant sought imputed income, retroactive and ongoing child support, a permanent restraining order, damages for assault and battery, and a divorce.

The respondent failed to provide financial disclosure and did not attend the hearing.

The court imputed income to the respondent at $80,000 per annum, awarded retroactive child support of $61,134 and ongoing support of $1,172 per month.

A permanent restraining order was issued against the respondent due to a history of verbal and physical abuse and the applicant's reasonable fear for safety.

General damages of $75,000 were awarded for domestic assaults, recognizing the egregious breach of trust in a marital relationship.

A divorce order was granted, along with a nominal spousal support award of $1.00 per month.

Costs were awarded to the applicant on a full indemnity basis, fixed at $45,664.

The respondent in a family law proceeding brought a motion to adjourn the trial scheduled for January 2016 to April or May 2016.

The moving party argued that an adjournment was necessary due to outstanding expert reports, incomplete questioning, and a pending section 30 assessment report.

The responding party opposed the motion, citing prejudice and the moving party's failure to comply with previous timetables.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the moving party had twice consented to trial dates and failed to comply with the associated timetables, and that further delay would prejudice the responding party and the parties' child.

The respondent father brought a motion to terminate or vary child support obligations established by prior consent orders, arguing that the parties’ adult child was no longer a dependent after changing schools, residing in Toronto for a period, and receiving student loans and grants.

The court found that the child remained a dependent due to documented learning disabilities and continued pursuit of a first undergraduate degree with a reduced course load.

The temporary change in residence and attendance at another institution did not constitute a change in circumstances warranting termination or reduction of support during the five‑year period contemplated by the consent order.

The court held the father to his contractual commitment to pay $5,000 per month child support and post‑secondary expenses for the agreed five‑year period.

For the sixth and final year of studies, support was recalculated based on the father’s income and set at $2,921 per month until completion of the degree.