Jordan McKie

The applicant moved for a post-judgment Mareva injunction in aid of execution, alleging the respondent intended to sell his home and move to Mexico to avoid paying child support and costs.

The court found the applicant established a strong prima facie case that there was a risk the respondent intended to remove assets from the jurisdiction.

The balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction, which was ordered to remain in effect for 120 days.

The applicant moved for temporary spousal support and the respondent cross-moved to vary a temporary parenting schedule to increase his access.

The parties have a special needs child requiring constant care, limiting the applicant's employment.

The court ordered the respondent to pay mid-range temporary spousal support of $1,070 per month, declining to impute a higher income to the applicant or deduct the respondent's debt payments.

The court dismissed the respondent's cross-motion to vary the parenting schedule, finding insufficient compelling evidence to alter the status quo pending the upcoming trial.

The claimant sought $45,670.50 in child support arrears from the estate of her late ex-husband, dating back to a 1978 decree nisi.

The estate trustee contested the claim, arguing it was uncorroborated under s. 13 of the Evidence Act and partially statute-barred.

The court found the claimant's evidence of non-payment was corroborated by her current husband.

However, arrears accruing prior to January 1, 1984, were statute-barred under the former Limitations Act, and the doctrine of special circumstances did not apply to extend the period.

Applying the DiFrancesco factors, the court ordered the estate to pay the enforceable arrears of $20,275.