The applicant brought an urgent motion seeking the return of the child, Maddaline, to her primary care as per a separation agreement, after the respondent unilaterally withheld the child following a temporary COVID-19 arrangement.
The respondent sought to maintain primary care based on the child's stated preference.
The court found urgency due to the respondent's self-help actions in changing the long-standing status quo.
While acknowledging the child's views, the court determined that the views were potentially influenced by the circumstances created by the respondent and lacked sufficient consistency over time.
The court ordered the child's immediate return to the applicant's primary care and school in her catchment area, upholding the prior status quo.
Claims for temporary decision-making and a police assistance clause were dismissed without prejudice.
