Johnston J.

A motion to change a prior custody order arising from a high-conflict parenting relationship was heard after a previous trial had ordered joint custody with each child primarily residing with a different parent.

The court found that the parents’ ongoing inability to communicate or make joint decisions regarding medical treatment, schooling, and other matters constituted a material change in circumstances under s. 17 of the Divorce Act.

Evidence demonstrated that the joint custody arrangement had become unworkable and that the conflict was negatively affecting the children.

The court concluded that continuing joint custody would risk harm and that decision‑making authority should be vested separately with each parent.

Sole custody of one child was granted to each parent while maintaining the existing residential arrangements, along with detailed provisions addressing access, communication, counselling, and child support.

The Crown brought a written request under Rule 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss a self-represented litigant's motion on the basis that it was frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process.

The court found the motion did not actually raise questions of law, instead inviting findings of fact and reasserting long-standing allegations of police misconduct that had been advanced in multiple prior proceedings.

The court held the motion was a thinly veiled attempt to revisit issues already disposed of on multiple occasions.

The Rule 2.1 request was granted and the underlying motion was dismissed, with costs submissions to follow.