Katrina A. Prystupa

The appellant appealed an order setting aside a final consent order that had resolved all issues in matrimonial litigation, including custody and access.

The respondent had moved to set aside the order on the basis that his solicitor did not consult him regarding the final document.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the motion judge lacked the necessary foundation to exercise the discretion to refuse to give effect to the settlement agreement.

The respondent's affidavit was feeble, he failed to adequately explain a 5.5-month delay, and the motion was served on short notice while the appellant was away.

The order was set aside without prejudice to the respondent renewing his motion on better material.

The mother appealed a trial judgment ordering joint custody of the parties' three children and requiring her to pay child and spousal support.

The Court of Appeal upheld the joint custody order, finding the trial judge made no palpable and overriding error in concluding the parents could communicate effectively regarding the children.

However, the Court allowed the appeal regarding support, finding the trial judge erred by failing to impute income to the father despite evidence he worked part-time while receiving a disability pension.

The Court also set aside the future support orders due to the uncertainty of multiple contingencies, ordering instead that each parent bear the expense of supporting the children while in their care.