Heidi Popovic

The parties resolved all parenting, support, and most property issues prior to trial, leaving only the valuation of the respondent's three properties in Greece on the dates of marriage and separation.

The court accepted the respondent's expert valuator's methodology but made several adjustments to correct mathematical errors and unsupported assumptions regarding market conditions and property comparables.

After determining the values of the Greek properties, the court calculated the final equalization payment owed to the applicant and awarded pre-judgment interest, noting the respondent had retained the assets and delayed realizing their equity.

The court determined costs following a motion and cross-motion regarding parenting time and decision-making.

The applicant father sought substantial parenting time, while the respondent mother sought a restrictive schedule and sole decision-making.

The court found that success was divided, as neither party achieved their primary positions.

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

The father brought a motion for a defined parenting schedule with the parties' three-year-old son, and the mother brought a cross-motion seeking sole decision-making responsibility and child support.

The court declined to make a temporary order on decision-making, finding it was not a pressing issue, but ordered the mother could enrol the child in Junior Kindergarten.

On parenting time, the court declined to apply the AFCC-O Parenting Plan Guide as a mandatory benchmark, disagreeing with the Divisional Court's apparent elevation of the Guide in Tremblay-Chartier v. Blanchette.

The court ordered a four-week rotating schedule giving the father midweek overnight and alternate weekend parenting time, balancing the child's need for stability against meaningful contact with the father in light of family violence allegations and the father's remedial steps.