Jessica Santucci

The father brought a motion to vary an interim parenting schedule, which was dismissed.

The mother sought costs of $11,063.26 as the successful party.

The court found the mother was the successful party and rejected the father's request to reserve costs to the trial judge.

However, the court reduced the quantum sought, noting the motion was not complex and the hourly rates claimed for counsel and law clerks were excessive for the nature of the proceeding.

Costs were fixed at $5,000, payable within 90 days, and were not made enforceable through the Family Responsibility Office as they did not relate to support.

The applicant father brought a motion to change a temporary, without-prejudice parenting order to expand his parenting time and alter exchange protocols.

The court found that the temporary order had crystallized into a status quo, requiring the father to demonstrate a material change in circumstances.

The court concluded that the father failed to establish a material change, as the alleged increase in conflict did not occur at parenting exchanges and the existing structure already minimized parental interaction.

Furthermore, the court held that the proposed variation was not in the best interests of the child, who has special needs, particularly while an assessment by the Office of the Children's Lawyer was ongoing.

The motion was dismissed.

The respondent mother sought permission to relocate the child, Mason, from Ontario to New Brunswick.

The applicant father opposed the relocation.

The court considered the child's best interests under the Children's Law Reform Act, including the child's strong wishes and preferences to remain in Ontario, the quality of the father's relationship with the child, the lack of compelling reasons for relocation, and the mother's concerning pattern of non-compliance with court orders.

The court denied the temporary relocation order, finding that relocation was not in the child's best interests at this time.