H.K. Juriansz

The Plaintiff brought three motions: for costs related to previous motions against TD Bank, to compel outstanding document productions from the Defendants, and for leave to amend her Statement of Claim.

The court awarded the Plaintiff partial indemnity costs of $3,000 against the Defendants for their conduct in unnecessarily prolonging the TD Bank motions, but reserved the issue of full indemnity costs based on alleged fraud to the trial judge.

The court also issued specific orders compelling the Defendants to produce various financial documents within 60 days.

The Plaintiff was granted leave to amend her Statement of Claim to increase claims for aggravated and punitive damages, with other proposed amendments adjourned.

The applicant sought costs on a full recovery basis for three motions, arguing the respondent acted in bad faith and unreasonably by failing to provide financial disclosure and thwarting a settlement conference.

The court rejected the respondent's arguments that his behaviour was reasonable and that costs should be deferred.

Finding the respondent's conduct warranted full recovery, the court awarded the applicant $22,000 in costs, to be paid from the respondent's share of the matrimonial home proceeds.

On an interim custody motion and cross‑motion involving four young children, the court considered competing requests for parallel parenting and sole custody.

The mother sought temporary sole custody with limited access for the father based largely on allegations of domestic violence and an Office of the Children’s Lawyer report recommending that arrangement.

The father sought a parallel‑parenting structure and equal time.

Applying s. 16 of the Divorce Act and best‑interests principles, the court found significant credibility concerns regarding several abuse allegations and determined the status quo created after separation resulted largely from unilateral conduct by the mother.

The court declined to grant sole or joint custody and instead ordered a temporary divided parallel‑parenting regime allocating decision‑making authority between the parents and gradually expanding the father’s parenting time toward a structured rotating schedule.

Following the dismissal of the defendant's motion for summary judgment, the parties made written submissions on costs.

The plaintiff sought substantial indemnity costs, arguing the motion was unreasonable.

The defendant argued no costs should be awarded or, alternatively, sought its own costs for relief resolved prior to the motion.

The court found the defendant's motion was not unreasonable based on the pleadings and awarded the plaintiff partial indemnity costs fixed at $7,000, declining to award the defendant costs for the pre-motion resolved issues.