Hilary Jenkins

The parties brought cross-motions regarding interim parenting time for their three children.

The court previously restricted the respondent father's parenting time due to his unvaccinated status, but the Divisional Court overturned this restriction.

The court balanced the children's need for a meaningful relationship with their father against the mother's historical role as primary caregiver and allegations of domestic violence.

The court ordered an expanded interim parenting schedule for the father, including alternating weekends and mid-week visits, totaling approximately 38 hours per week.

This endorsement addresses costs following motions for parenting orders, including decision-making responsibility for a child's Covid-19 vaccination and exclusive possession of the matrimonial home.

The applicant mother was largely successful on the underlying motions, having been granted primary care, decision-making responsibility for the Covid-19 vaccination, and permission to move from the matrimonial home with the children.

The mother sought $5,000 in costs, while the father requested each party bear their own costs.

The court found the mother was more successful and acted reasonably, and awarded her $3,000 in costs, inclusive of disbursements and taxes, to be paid by the father.

The court also confirmed that a costs order can be made even if the underlying judgment is subject to appeal.

The applicant mother and respondent father brought cross-motions concerning decision-making responsibility for their children, specifically regarding COVID-19 vaccination, parenting time, and exclusive possession of the matrimonial home.

The court granted the mother sole decision-making responsibility for the children's COVID-19 vaccination, finding it to be in the children's best interests based on public health guidance.

The mother was also granted primary care of the children and permission to move from the matrimonial home with the children.

The father's parenting time was restricted with conditions related to COVID-19 testing and exposure.

Both parties' claims for exclusive possession of the matrimonial home were dismissed, with a temporary arrangement allowing the mother and children to move out while the father remained responsible for home expenses.

The applicant father brought a motion to find the respondent mother in contempt of a temporary parenting order after she withheld access to their child.

The mother withheld access pending a police and Children's Aid Society investigation into suspected child abuse, which was ultimately closed without charges.

The court dismissed the contempt motion, finding the mother had a reasonably held belief and legitimate justification for withholding the child.

The court also dismissed the father's requests to change primary residence, order joint custody, and restrict the maternal grandmother's contact, finding insufficient evidence of parental alienation or compelling reasons to vary the interim order.