J. Craig

The applicant mother brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a final order for sole custody and specified access based on a settlement reached at a settlement conference.

The respondent father opposed the motion, denying an agreement was reached and arguing that the Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) recommendations were vague and circumstances had changed.

The court found that an enforceable agreement was reached at the settlement conference and that there were no genuine issues requiring a trial.

The court granted the summary judgment motion, awarding sole custody to the mother and specified access to the father in accordance with the OCL recommendations, finding it to be in the best interests of the child.

The applicant brought a motion to change a prior spousal support order on the basis that his retirement constituted a material change in circumstances under s.17 of the Divorce Act.

He had voluntarily retired at age 62, reducing his income from over $200,000 to approximately $68,000 in pension income, and sought termination of his $2,000 monthly support obligation.

The court reviewed jurisprudence concerning voluntary retirement and variation of support, emphasizing that retirement alone does not automatically constitute a material change.

The court found the retirement was voluntary, undertaken for lifestyle reasons, and that the payor remained financially comfortable and had failed to plan for continuing support obligations despite rising income over many years.

The applicant therefore failed to establish a material change in circumstances warranting termination of spousal support.

The applicant brought a motion for interim child support, interim spousal support, and an advance of funds to retain a forensic accountant and cover legal fees.

The dispute concerned the respondent’s true income from a financial planning business operated through a corporation, with allegations of co‑mingled personal and corporate finances and inadequate disclosure.

Applying Rule 24(12) of the Family Law Rules and authorities governing interim disbursements, the court held that expert assistance was necessary to assess the respondent’s income and level the playing field.

The respondent was ordered to contribute $10,000 toward the cost of a forensic accounting report and to pay interim child support based on an imputed income of $60,000.

No interim spousal support or advance for legal fees was ordered.

Following a motion concerning interim support on a mature family law file, the court addressed costs after written submissions.

The respondent to the underlying motion sought full indemnity costs exceeding $37,000, citing the other party’s failure to provide proper financial disclosure and litigation conduct that had prolonged the proceedings.

The court emphasized that frank and complete disclosure is fundamental in family litigation and that failure to provide disclosure may justify investigative costs, including expert reports.

While the court declined to award full indemnity costs due to the presence of a settlement offer, it found the responding party’s conduct justified enhanced partial indemnity costs.

Costs of $25,000 inclusive of disbursements were awarded and made enforceable in the same manner as support.

In a family law motion addressing support and disclosure issues, the respondent sought an order striking the applicant's pleadings for repeated failure to comply with court‑ordered financial disclosure and payment obligations.

The court found significant non‑compliance with disclosure orders and drew adverse inferences about the applicant’s income, particularly concerning unreported cash business revenue and personal expenses paid through the business.

While the court declined to strike pleadings due to access‑to‑justice concerns, it relied heavily on the respondent’s evidence and expert accounting analysis to determine income.

The applicant’s income was fixed at $125,000 for interim purposes and the respondent’s at $17,362.

The court ordered increased child support, interim spousal support, and contribution to section 7 expenses, while leaving costs submissions to follow.