Joanne Beasley

An application to vary a Texas divorce decree recognized in Ontario under section 41 of the Children's Law Reform Act.

The applicant father sought to impose a geographical restriction on the respondent mother's ability to relocate with the children outside the Region of Peel, Ontario, and sought child support.

The court found a material change in circumstances based on the mother's pattern of conduct including misrepresentation of her address, interference with parenting time, false allegations to police and child protective services, and coaching of children.

The court imposed a geographical restriction, ordered child support, and found the mother in breach of the order, awarding costs.

This case involves two motions to change a prior consent order regarding parenting and child support for a 13-year-old child.

The primary issues were the mother's proposed relocation from Mississauga to Burlington, the parenting schedule, decision-making responsibility, extracurricular activities, child support, and retroactive adjustments.

The court granted the mother's request to relocate, finding it in the child's best interests, and adjusted the parenting schedule to give the father three weekends per month and shared summer time.

The court declined to change decision-making responsibility, maintaining the mother's final say after consultation.

On financial matters, the court declined to impute income to the father but imputed a lower income to the mother based on OSAP receipt.

Child support was adjusted retroactively, and an overpayment by the father was credited.

Section 7 expenses were ordered to be shared proportionately to income.

This case involved multiple motions concerning parenting arrangements and decision-making for four children following the death of their mother/sister.

The applicant, the maternal grandmother, sought sole decision-making for one child and increased parenting time/reunification therapy for two others.

The respondents, including the great-grandmother and an extended family member, sought various parenting and decision-making orders.

The court ordered shared decision-making and a week-on-week-off parenting schedule for the youngest child between the grandmother and great-grandmother.

Sole decision-making and primary residence were granted to the extended family member for the two older children, respecting their views.

The court dismissed the request for reunification therapy, finding it not beneficial given the children's wishes and family dysfunction.

The Children's Aid Society's handling of the case was also criticized for failing to adequately address the children's emotional needs and views.

The court addressed motions concerning parenting arrangements for a young child, following the mother's unsubstantiated allegations of sexual abuse by the father's older children and concerns about the mother's repeated, intrusive physical examinations of the child.

Finding no evidence of abuse and concluding the mother's actions were harmful, the court transferred primary care to the father.

The mother's parenting time was ordered to be supervised, with prohibitions on her direct involvement in the child's personal care and from denigrating the father or his children.