Haya Sakakini

The moving party sought leave to appeal the decision of the lower court.

The Divisional Court granted the motion for leave to appeal, ordered the appeal to be expedited, and reserved the issue of costs to the panel deciding the appeal.

The Respondent father sought unsupervised and increased parenting time, including overnights, and equal parenting time after Labour Day.

The Applicant mother opposed this, requesting the continuation of supervised parenting time and bringing a cross-motion for primary residence and sole decision-making responsibility.

The court, applying the best interests of the child test, granted the father unsupervised daytime parenting time and supervised overnight parenting time, acknowledging his efforts to address past issues while noting serious concerns regarding his criminal history and lack of accountability.

The Applicant's cross-motion for sole decision-making and primary residence was dismissed as premature.

The applicant brought a motion for leave to appeal an order.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal.

However, because the motion judge delayed releasing reasons for three and a half months, which justified bringing the motion, the court made no order as to costs.

The court also noted that the best interests of the child would be served by proceeding to trial as quickly as possible.