Joseph Paradiso

The moving party sought panel review of an order refusing a further extension of time to perfect an appeal from a Superior Court order.

The court held that review of a motion judge's decision is deferential and not a de novo reconsideration.

The moving party identified no legal error or misapprehension of evidence in the motion judge's reasoning on delay and prejudice.

The panel declined to reweigh the factors and dismissed the motion with costs.

This endorsement addresses two outstanding issues: the effect of the respondent's interim child support overpayments and the costs of the motions.

The court ordered the respondent's child support overpayment to be credited monthly over the remainder of 2023 to ensure continuous support for the children.

Regarding costs, the respondent, who was successful on a novel summary judgment motion, sought substantial indemnity costs.

The court awarded partial indemnity costs of $20,000, finding the respondent's settlement offer lacked compromise and acknowledging the applicant's reasonable opposition to a novel legal issue.

The applicant sought interim child and spousal support in Ontario, while the respondent sought recognition and enforcement of Chinese divorce judgments that addressed child support and property division but not spousal support.

The court found that the applicant had attorned to the Chinese jurisdiction by participating in the Chinese proceedings.

The court dismissed the applicant's public policy arguments against enforcing the Chinese judgments, including the lower child support amount and the absence of spousal support in Chinese law, finding that these did not "shock the moral conscience" of the Canadian court.

Consequently, the respondent's motion for summary judgment recognizing and enforcing the Chinese judgments was granted, and the applicant's motion for interim support was dismissed, as the Ontario court lacked jurisdiction over issues already adjudicated in China.