Kibondo Kilongozi

The applicant moved to amend a previous Superior Court order that dismissed its action, seeking to add a clause stating the dismissal was without prejudice to a parallel Small Claims Court action.

The court found that the applicant had obtained a default judgment in Small Claims Court without notice to the respondent and failed to disclose this to the Superior Court judge who dismissed the action the following day.

The court dismissed the motion, finding no justification to interfere with the Small Claims Court process and noting that the requirements for amending an order under Rule 59.06 were not met.

The court also noted significant evidence suggesting the applicant was a fictional entity created by a declared vexatious litigant using aliases.

The moving party husband brought a motion for security for costs and for the payment of a previously ordered costs award.

The responding party wife brought a cross-motion to amend her pleadings to claim unpaid salary and occupation rent, and for leave to file late expert business evaluation reports.

The court found that the responding party's effective residence was outside Ontario, she had an unpaid costs award, and she had caused substantial delay in the proceedings.

The court ordered the responding party to post $60,000 in security for costs and pay the outstanding $5,000 costs award, failing which her case would be removed from the trial list.

The court dismissed the responding party's motion to amend pleadings due to delay and unfairness, but granted her leave to file most of the late expert reports.

In a child protection proceeding under the Child and Family Services Act, all parties agreed the children remained in need of protection due to parental incapacity and sought a permanent care plan under s. 57.1.

Competing plans proposed placement with maternal grandparents, with the paternal grandmother, or maintenance of split placements.

After reviewing extensive evidence on caregiving capacity, family conflict, cultural and religious issues, and the children’s best interests, the court ordered shared legal custody between the maternal grandparents and the paternal grandmother on an alternating weekly schedule.

The court also set terms for religious holidays, birthday exchanges, and transition arrangements.