Julia Passeri

The applicant sought an order for her expert, Paul Mandel, to provide testimony at trial regarding the respondent's income and business valuation, despite a conflict of interest arising from Mandel joining MNP LLP, a firm that had previously provided services to the respondent.

The respondent opposed, arguing a conflict impacting Mandel's independence.

The court granted the applicant's motion, ordering Mandel to testify, limiting his scope to his original report.

The court found no actual conflict of interest that would preclude Mandel's testimony, distinguishing expert witnesses from lawyers regarding conflict rules, and emphasizing the expert's duty of impartiality.

Costs were awarded to the applicant, payable by both the respondent and MNP LLP.

The respondent father brought a motion seeking an order for the Peel Children’s Aid Society to produce its file on the family and for expanded parenting time, including overnight visits, with his 4-year-old child.

The applicant mother consented to the CAS file production but opposed the expanded parenting time, citing an ongoing Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) investigation and allegations of family violence.

The court granted the order for the CAS file but dismissed the motion for expanded parenting time as premature, emphasizing the need to await the OCL report and considering the child's age and the family violence allegations.

The applicant initiated proceedings for a simple divorce.

The respondent contested the separation date and sought to invalidate prenuptial and separation agreements, along with claims for equalization of net family property and spousal support.

The court bifurcated the trial to first determine the separation date and the validity of the agreements.

The court found the date of separation to be January 6, 2016, which consequently barred the respondent's property claims due to the statutory limitation period.

Additionally, the court upheld the validity and enforceability of both the prenuptial and separation agreements, dismissing the respondent's attempts to set them aside.