Halia Michalko

Following the resolution of a family law application involving parenting time and section 7 expenses, the court determined the issue of costs.

The applicant had sought an accounting of section 7 expenses and other relief, but met with little success and engaged in relentless ad hominem attacks against the respondent.

The court found that the applicant's conduct drove up his legal fees unnecessarily.

Applying the principles of divided success and responsibility for unnecessary costs, the court ordered that the parties bear their own costs.

Following divided success on their respective family law motions, both the applicant and respondent sought costs.

The applicant sought full indemnity costs based on an offer to settle, while the respondent sought substantial indemnity costs.

The court found that neither party was substantially successful, both parties engaged in inappropriate conduct that unnecessarily increased costs, and the applicant's offer to settle was not substantially more favourable than the order obtained.

Consequently, the court ordered that each party bear their own costs.

The father brought a motion for increased parenting time and joint decision-making authority, while the mother brought a cross-motion seeking sole decision-making, a Voice of the Child Report, child support, section 7 expenses, an anger management course, and drug testing for the father.

The court granted the father increased parenting time but awarded the mother sole decision-making authority over medical issues.

The court also ordered the involvement of the Office of the Children's Lawyer or a Voice of the Child Report, directed the father to pay child support and section 7 arrears, and ordered him to complete an anger management program.

The mother's requests for drug testing and disclosure of third-party medical records were dismissed.