The appellant father challenged an order holding that Ontario could exercise jurisdiction over custody and access proceedings involving children born and living in Dubai.
Although neither parent was ordinarily resident in Ontario for Divorce Act purposes and the children were not habitually resident in Ontario, the motion judge found the criteria in s. 22(1)(b) of the Children’s Law Reform Act were met.
The Court of Appeal held that those findings were supported by the evidence, including the children’s real and substantial connection to Ontario and the balance of convenience favouring Ontario.
The court also refused fresh evidence directed to one aspect of the Dubai court access issue and dismissed the appeal.
