2 total
An urgent motion for a refraining order was dismissed as moot after the Family Responsibility Office cancelled licence suspensions.
The applicant brought an urgent motion seeking a refraining order to prevent the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) from suspending his driver's licence and an order suspending FRO's enforcement proceedings.
The urgent aspect of the motion became moot when FRO cancelled licence suspension proceedings due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The request for a stay of enforcement was dismissed because it was not served on the support recipient and was typically part of a motion to change, not a freestanding claim.
The motion was dismissed without prejudice to the applicant's right to bring a further motion at a later date.
Costs awarded against the Family Responsibility Office for unreasonably resuming driver's licence suspension proceedings.
The applicant sought costs against the Director of the Family Responsibility Office following a successful motion to refrain the suspension of his driver's licence.
The applicant had agreed to spousal support provisions in a separation agreement and had commenced a motion to change the support amount due to a significant reduction in income.
The Director had previously agreed not to pursue enforcement if the applicant commenced a motion to change, which he did.
However, approximately six months later, without prior notice or consultation, the Director issued a notice to suspend the applicant's driver's licence.
The applicant brought a motion to refrain the suspension, which was resolved when the parties agreed to withdraw the support agreement from the Director's office.
The court found that the Director's decision to restart aggressive enforcement without prior notice or consultation constituted special and unusual circumstances justifying a costs award against the government agency.
