Julie Ada

The applicant father brought a motion to expand his parenting time with his two children and to have it unsupervised.

The respondent mother opposed, citing the father's recent criminal charges, substance abuse issues, and mental health concerns, and requested sole decision-making authority and child support.

The court found that while the father has a loving relationship with the children, the mother raised reasonable concerns necessitating temporary supervised parenting time until further evidence regarding his alcohol issues and criminal charges could be assessed.

The court ordered expanded supervised parenting time by an agreed-upon third party and ordered the father to pay $1,000 per month in child support.

The applicant grandmother brought a motion for temporary contact with her 7-year-old grandchild after the respondent parents suspended contact in February 2020.

The parents, who share joint residency, opposed the motion, citing concerns about inappropriate behaviour and parental autonomy.

The court dismissed the temporary motion, finding insufficient evidence to conclude the parents acted arbitrarily under the Chapman test.

However, the court ordered the involvement of the Office of the Children's Lawyer for a s. 112 assessment to assist in determining the child's best interests.