The applicant mother brought a motion seeking temporary custody of the parties’ four‑year‑old child, child support, contribution to section 7 daycare expenses, and orders relating to the jointly owned matrimonial home pending trial.
The parties had been following a temporary “2‑2‑3” shared parenting arrangement which had resulted in ongoing parental conflict and police involvement.
Applying the best interests of the child factors under s. 24(2) of the Children’s Law Reform Act, the court found the arrangement unworkable and determined that the child should primarily reside with the mother, who had historically been the primary caregiver and could provide greater stability and routine.
The court granted the mother temporary custody with defined access to the father, ordered guideline child support and contribution to daycare expenses based on the father’s income, and directed the father to maintain and clean the jointly owned home pending sale.
