Kevin H. Robins

This trial judgment addresses various family law issues following a marital separation, including spousal and child support, the valuation of a corporate interest, and an oppression remedy claim.

The court found the respondent's financial disclosure and credibility severely lacking, leading to adverse inferences regarding his income.

The respondent's income for support purposes was imputed by disregarding corporate losses that primarily served his personal lifestyle.

The applicant's claim for an oppression remedy was dismissed on procedural grounds due to prior partial minutes of settlement that did not list it as an outstanding issue.

The applicant sought to adopt his adult step‑daughter pursuant to the Child and Family Services Act.

The court reviewed jurisprudence on adult adoptions and identified four governing criteria: the adoption must create a genuine change in the relationship, the parties must understand and intend the legal incidents of adoption, the application must respond to a psychological or emotional need for a parental relationship, and the adoption must enhance and strengthen the relationship.

The evidence established a long‑standing de facto father‑daughter relationship and a parental gap caused by the limited involvement of the biological father.

The court concluded that formalizing the relationship through adoption would strengthen family bonds and provide permanence and stability.

The adoption order was granted.

The court determined the issue of costs in a long-running family law proceeding involving access to children after the respondent’s pleadings had been struck.

The respondent relied on Rule 24(10) of the Family Law Rules, arguing costs should have been decided promptly after each step.

The court found that costs had been adjourned to allow the self‑represented respondent an opportunity to retain counsel and that no earlier opportunity existed to assess them.

Reviewing the bill of costs and the procedural history, the court concluded the matter was not complex but had been prolonged by the respondent’s conduct.

Costs were awarded to the applicant in the amount of $8,500 inclusive of disbursements and HST.