J. Cvetkovic

The respondent requested a five-month adjournment of the trial due to medical issues, despite previously agreeing to a peremptory trial date.

The applicant opposed the adjournment but requested the release of funds held in trust from the sale of the matrimonial home if the trial was delayed.

The court removed the trial from the current sittings and adjourned the matter to be spoken to, noting the unfairness of the repeated delays to the applicant.

To balance the prejudice, the court ordered the immediate release of the applicant's 50% share of the home proceeds, plus a $15,000 advance from the respondent's share to account for costs thrown away and ongoing needs.

Following settlement of all parenting issues during a contested custody trial, the court determined costs.

The applicant mother had offered settlement terms largely consistent with the ultimate resolution, including sole decision‑making authority, while the respondent father pursued joint custody despite significant conflict and concerns identified in a s. 30 assessment.

The court found the applicant was more successful overall and criticized aspects of the respondent’s litigation conduct, including unilateral and intimidating behaviour and trial strategies that prolonged proceedings.

Applying Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules and considering proportionality and ability to pay, the court awarded partial indemnity costs to the applicant.