Jessica Fuller

The applicant mother brought a motion to change seeking sole decision-making and a week-about parenting schedule.

The respondent father sought sole decision-making, reduced parenting time for the mother, child support adjustments, a restraining order, and a declaration that the mother is a vexatious litigant.

The court found a material change in circumstances due to the mother's escalating confrontational behavior, failure to follow court orders, and inappropriate social media posts.

The court awarded sole decision-making to the father, reduced the mother's parenting time to every second weekend, imputed income to the mother for child support purposes, granted a restraining order, and declared the mother a vexatious litigant.

The applicant father brought an urgent motion seeking the return of the children to Pembroke, Ontario, enrollment in in-person schooling, and primary parenting time.

The respondent mother conceded to returning to Pembroke and enrolling the children in in-person schooling.

The court dismissed the applicant's request for primary parenting time, finding insufficient evidence to justify altering the long-standing status quo of week-about shared parenting on an interim basis.

The applicant mother sought a temporary change in child residency and parenting time due to COVID-19 concerns related to the father's partner's occupation as a personal support worker in a long-term care facility, and a week-about schedule during school closures.

The respondent father brought a cross-motion to enforce existing orders.

The court dismissed both motions, finding no material change in circumstances to justify altering existing final orders, and that the father and his partner were taking reasonable precautions.

The court emphasized the need for co-operation and full disclosure regarding COVID-19 issues.

This is a sentencing decision for Martial Laverdure, who was found guilty of dangerous driving causing death.

The court considered the offender's mental health issues, Indigenous background (applying Gladue principles), lack of significant criminal record, and the circumstances of the offence, which involved excessive speed and striking multiple pedestrians, resulting in one fatality.

Victim impact statements were also considered.

The Crown sought 2.5 years imprisonment and a 5-year driving prohibition, while the defence sought 9 months imprisonment, probation, and a 3-year driving suspension.

The court imposed a sentence of 22 months imprisonment, one year probation, a 10-year weapons prohibition, and a 5-year driving prohibition.

The accused was charged with dangerous driving causing death after striking and fatally injuring a pedestrian following a hockey game.

The court heard evidence from civilian and police witnesses, including accident reconstruction experts.

The judge found that the accused was driving at a high rate of speed (estimated 60 km/h) in an area with significant pedestrian traffic, which constituted a marked departure from the standard of care expected of a reasonable person.

The accused was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.