Judith Millard

This decision addresses whether a religious marriage ceremony (Nikah) performed in Ontario without a marriage licence or registration can be deemed a valid marriage under s. 31 of the Marriage Act, and whether the parties are "spouses" for the purposes of the Family Law Act.

The court finds that the applicant intended to be legally married and relied on the respondent to make the necessary arrangements, satisfying the requirements of s. 31.

The marriage is deemed valid, and both parties are declared spouses entitled to claim equalization of net family property.

The Applicant, Valoris for Children and Adults of Prescott-Russell, brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a final order for extended society care for the child B.J.M.O., who had previously been found in need of protection.

The respondent parents opposed, arguing for a trial on disposition and access, proposing custody to kin or interim supervision.

The court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issue for trial.

It ordered extended society care for the child, with access to parents at the Society's discretion (due to criminal no-contact conditions and a broken relationship) and sibling access as determined by the Society.

The decision emphasized the child's best interests, stability, and the unsuitability of other options.

The applicant father brought a motion to restrict the respondent mother's access to their two children due to concerns about her mental health, seizures, and her new living situation with a partner who had a past sexual assault conviction.

The court considered the children's best interests under the Children's Law Reform Act.

While acknowledging the father's legitimate concerns, the court found that a drastic change to the existing access order was not warranted.

Instead, it made minor adjustments to the safety plan, eliminating overnight access temporarily and imposing conditions for adult supervision during access, with instructions to notify the father in case of a seizure.

The court dismissed the father's requests for access to occur outside the mother's home and a blanket no-contact order with her new partner.

The applicant father sought an urgent hearing during the COVID-19 pandemic, raising concerns about the safety and well-being of his two young children (ages 1 and 3) in relation to the mother's access, physical and mental health, and choice of partner.

The court, acting as a triage judge, determined that the matter met the test for urgency as outlined in various Notices to the Profession issued during the pandemic, noting that the existing interim order was on a without prejudice basis and circumstances had substantially changed.

The court granted the urgent hearing, setting a condensed schedule for responding materials and scheduling a teleconference hearing for April 17, 2020.