Martin James

The applicant mother brought a motion to increase the respondent father's child support payments to 50% of his net pay to accelerate the repayment of arrears.

The father had been paying ongoing support and a voluntary amount towards arrears.

The court dismissed the request to increase the arrears repayment rate, finding the current rate reasonable.

The court ordered an adjustment to the ongoing child support based on the father's 2016 income and updated guidelines, without prejudice to the father's right to challenge the older child's ongoing entitlement.

Costs of $300 were awarded to the respondent father.

The applicant brought a motion to continue a certificate of pending litigation on a property she previously resided in.

She claimed an interest in the property through an unproven constructive trust and alleged that the respondent's sale of the fire-damaged property to a third party was a fraudulent conveyance.

The court found the applicant's claim to an interest in the land to be tenuous and noted the absence of typical badges of fraud.

The motion was dismissed and the certificate of pending litigation was ordered vacated.

The moving party mother brought a motion seeking week-about parenting time for her two children, aged 15 and 8.

The Office of the Children's Lawyer reported that the older child preferred visiting every second Saturday, and the younger child preferred day visits only due to anxiety.

The court dismissed the request for week-about parenting, ordering day visits for the younger child on Saturdays and maintaining the current arrangement for the older child.

No costs were awarded.

The applicant father brought a motion for access to his two children, whom he had not seen for nearly a year and a half due to a no-contact order following criminal convictions for assaulting and threatening them.

The respondent mother brought a cross-motion to appoint the Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) and dismiss the access motion pending the OCL's recommendations.

The court ordered that the OCL be requested to ascertain the children's views and preferences, with a private psychotherapist to be engaged if the OCL declined.

The no-contact order was modified to accommodate the involvement of the OCL or the therapist.

Costs were reserved.

This is an addendum to a sentencing decision.

The court converted the offender's sentence from months to days to properly reflect the credit for pre-trial custody on a count-by-count basis.

The total sentence before credit was calculated as 3242 days, with 1965 days of credit, leaving an actual sentence of 1277 days.

The offender pleaded guilty to six counts of sexual assault and three counts of voyeurism involving nine victims.

The offences involved surreptitiously recording and sexually touching women while they were asleep or unaware.

The Crown sought a global sentence of 12 years and 10 months and a long-term offender designation with a 10-year supervision order.

The court imposed a global sentence of 8.9 years, reduced to 42 months going forward after credit for pre-sentence custody.

The court also designated the offender as a long-term offender, imposing a 6-year supervision order, finding a substantial risk of re-offending that could eventually be controlled in the community.

The self-represented accused applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 11(b) of the Charter, arguing unreasonable delay.

He was charged with intimidation of a justice system participant, and the anticipated time from charge to trial was 33 months.

The court found that a four-month delay during the preliminary hearing was attributable to the accused, as he failed to complete his cross-examination in the allotted time and subsequently waived the remainder after an adjournment.

Deducting this defence delay brought the net delay below the 30-month presumptive ceiling.

The application was dismissed.

The respondent father brought a motion seeking an order to compel the applicant mother to cooperate with an update to a Custody/Access Assessment and to share the cost of the update.

The respondent also sought an order requiring the applicant to sign consents for the release of the children's medical and educational records.

The court ordered the applicant to cooperate with the update to ensure the trial could proceed as scheduled, but directed the respondent to pay the cost of the update.

The court also ordered the applicant to execute the requested consents.

The offender pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated assault after stabbing three people at a New Year's Eve party.

The 25-year-old offender had a lengthy criminal record including 13 prior assault convictions.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence, noting the unprovoked nature of the attack and the severe impact on the victims.

The offender was sentenced to a global term of approximately 62 months, reduced to 38 months net after credit for pre-sentence custody.

The applicant brought a motion for interim spousal support, life insurance, and health benefits following a 16-year marriage where she was the primary caregiver.

The respondent argued his new financial commitments to his fiancée should lessen his support obligations and that the applicant should be self-sufficient.

The court rejected the respondent's argument regarding new financial commitments but imputed a minimum wage income of $26,000 to the applicant.

The court ordered the respondent to pay $400 per month in interim spousal support, maintain $350,000 in life insurance, and reinstate the applicant on his extended health benefits plan.

The plaintiffs brought a motion for an order requiring the defendants to provide copies of the documents listed in Schedule A of their Affidavit of Documents.

The court noted that the moving party's counsel had prematurely demanded the documents immediately upon receiving the Affidavit of Documents, contrary to good practice.

The court dismissed the motion, observing that it appeared to be a tactic to gain more time to deliver a further affidavit, and extended the timeline for the delivery of that affidavit.

The defendant lawyer brought a motion to strike the self-represented plaintiff's statement of claim, arguing it disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was frivolous.

The plaintiff alleged the defendant delayed scheduling her bail hearing because he was working as a part-time Crown Attorney.

The court found that while much of the claim was improperly drafted and irrelevant, it contained a viable cause of action in negligence or breach of contract regarding the bail hearing delay.

The court struck the offending portions of the claim but allowed the core action to proceed, awarding the defendant $1,000 in costs for partial success.

The applicant brought a motion seeking a finding of contempt against the respondent for failing to provide updated income information, a change in custody and access for their 17-year-old daughter, and authorization to travel outside Canada without the respondent's consent.

The court found the respondent in contempt for deliberately withholding his income information, which was higher than previously disclosed, and ordered him to pay child support arrears.

The court also granted the applicant legal custody of the eldest daughter, with access subject to the daughter's wishes, and dispensed with the requirement for the respondent's consent for the applicant to travel with the children.

The respondent was ordered to pay costs of $2,500.

The moving party landlord brought a motion to discharge several construction liens registered against its property, arguing it was not an 'owner' under the Construction Lien Act because the work was requested by its bankrupt tenant.

The court found that the landlord and tenant were connected through common directors, officers, and legal counsel, and the landlord had paid substantial amounts for leasehold improvements.

The court dismissed the motion, concluding there was a genuine issue requiring a trial regarding the landlord's status as an owner.

The father brought a motion to change child support and the apportionment of post-secondary education expenses for the parties' children.

The court held that the mother's RRSP withdrawals and rental income must be included in her income for child support purposes.

The court suspended table child support for the child attending college away from home, except for the summer months.

The court enforced a prior consent order requiring the parents to pay two-thirds of post-secondary expenses in proportion to their incomes, but relieved the father of liability for prior expenses because he was not consulted.

Finally, the court ordered the parties to share uninsured dental expenses equally rather than proportionately.

Following a motion regarding the application of the Limitations Act, the successful respondent sought partial indemnity costs of $12,437.54.

The moving party had tendered a bill of costs for $13,390.00.

Noting that the respondent's position evolved during the motion and questioning the 48 hours docketed by junior counsel, the court fixed the respondent's costs at $6,500 plus disbursements and HST, payable by the moving party estate.

In a supplementary endorsement following an application regarding an estate, the court addressed three issues.

On consent, the court ordered that the distribution of the residue of the estate be delayed until the termination of the life estate in the applicant's favour.

The court declined the applicant's request to treat a vehicle as part of the household contents.

The court also declined the applicant's request to replace the named estate trustees, noting that no formal application for removal had been brought and a testator's choice of trustees is not lightly interfered with.

Following a trial where the applicant was unsuccessful in setting aside her late husband's will for undue influence but successful in obtaining an $85,000 lump sum support order under the Succession Law Reform Act, the court determined costs.

The applicant sought over $114,000, while the respondents argued the applicant should pay them a net amount of $42,518.87.

Applying Rule 57 and noting the mixed success, excessive time claimed by the applicant, and the respondents' improper pressure on the testator, the court awarded the applicant costs fixed at $51,940.27 inclusive of disbursements and HST.

Following a successful motion and trial of issues to enforce a settlement agreement, the applicant sought costs on a full indemnity basis totaling over $95,000.

The respondent argued for a set-off or a lower award due to her modest financial resources.

The court awarded costs to the applicant on a partial indemnity basis, noting that full indemnity was not warranted and considering proportionality and the respondent's ability to pay.

The respondent was ordered to pay a global amount of $40,221.22 in monthly installments over three years.

The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court decision ordering her to pay the respondent for the installation of two heating systems in a duplex.

The appellant argued the respondent's quote was for two furnaces, while the respondent maintained it was for one and that the parties agreed to double the price for two units.

The appeal court found no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual finding that the quote was for a single furnace.

The court also dismissed the appellant's claims regarding trial unfairness and bias, concluding the appeal should be dismissed.