Jeffrey Ordon

This Ontario Court of Justice decision addresses parenting and child support issues following the separation of V.T. and L.V.R. The mother sought sole decision-making responsibility, retroactive child support, and ongoing section 7 expenses, while the father sought joint decision-making and shared parenting time.

The court found that the mother should have sole decision-making responsibility and that the father's parenting time schedule remain as is, due to the lack of sufficient cooperation for equal sharing.

The court imputed income to the father higher than reported, including cash income and grossed-up amounts for unpaid taxes, resulting in retroactive child support arrears of $30,158.

The decision also outlines detailed parenting time schedules, holiday arrangements, travel provisions, and financial disclosure obligations.

The applicant father brought a motion seeking to increase his parenting time with the parties' three children to an equally shared schedule.

The respondent mother opposed, advocating for the continuation of the existing alternate weekend schedule.

The court, applying the recently amended Divorce Act, found it was in the children's best interests to allocate parenting time on a "week-about" shared schedule.

The decision emphasized that a status quo unilaterally imposed by one parent is not a strict presumption and gave significant weight to the Office of the Children's Lawyer report and the children's expressed wishes.

The Applicant brought a 14B motion seeking leave to file an affidavit containing a voice recording of conversations with the children, alleging the Respondent coached them.

The Respondent opposed the request and sought to file a responsive affidavit.

The court dismissed the Applicant's motion, finding the evidence in both affidavits and the recording to be unnecessary, unreliable, highly prejudicial, and of little probative value.

The court emphasized that parents should not gather evidence from their children and that the Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) is the appropriate mechanism for ascertaining children's views.

An order was also made for both parents to refrain from involving the children in the litigation.

The applicant wife brought a motion for retroactive and ongoing interim spousal support.

The respondent husband opposed the quantum and sought to impute income to the wife.

The court declined to impute income to the wife at the interim stage, noting that such determinations are better left for trial.

The court ordered the husband to pay a lump sum of $10,728 for retroactive support for 2019 and ongoing monthly support of $3,575 based on his 2020 income.