Jonathon Krashinsky

Following an interim order requiring the applicant mother to return the children to Guelph after a unilateral move to Ottawa, both parties sought costs.

The court determined that the respondent father was the successful party, as the mother's move was unreasonable and she was ordered to return the children.

Applying the principles from Mattina v. Mattina and Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules, the court fixed costs payable by the applicant to the respondent at $15,000.

The applicant sought interim custody of the children and permission to relocate their ordinary residence from Guelph to Ottawa.

The respondent opposed the relocation and sought joint custody with primary residence in Guelph.

The court granted interim primary residence to the applicant but denied the relocation, finding it not in the children's best interests.

The judge noted the applicant's "self-help" move to Ottawa without notice and the negative impact on the children's relationship with the respondent.

The order stipulated that if the applicant failed to return to Guelph, the children's primary residence would shift to the respondent.