Hilary Ingle

The applicant sought an interim 2-2-3 parenting schedule for their five-year-old daughter, N., following the parents' separation and the applicant's gender transition.

The respondent opposed, requesting a longer 'step-up' schedule.

The court considered N.'s best interests, noting her anxiety due to significant life changes and the respondent's role as primary caregiver.

The court ordered a phased 'step-up' parenting schedule, culminating in the applicant having parenting time 5 out of every 14 days, conditional on securing a suitable residence near the matrimonial home.

The court emphasized minimizing adverse impact on the child's well-being.

The respondent husband brought a motion to set aside a final order made after an uncontested trial, arguing that the equalization and spousal support calculations were based on mistakes and misrepresentations, and that his non-compliance was due to mental health issues.

The applicant wife brought a cross-motion to dismiss the husband's motion and to correct a $20,000 calculation error in the equalization payment.

The court applied the Mountainview Farms test and found the husband failed to provide a plausible explanation for his default or an arguable defence on the merits.

The husband's motion was dismissed, the order was amended to reflect the $20,000 credit, and costs were awarded to the wife.

The moving party sought to quash an appeal brought by the responding party from a motion judge's dismissal of a request to reconsider a costs order.

The Court of Appeal held that the motion judge's order refusing to reconsider the costs disposition was interlocutory, as it did not finally dispose of any substantive right.

Consequently, the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal, and the appeal was quashed with costs awarded to the moving party.