Kirsy Ralko

The applicant father brought a motion to find the respondent mother in contempt of court for wilfully disobeying a final order regarding parenting time and an interim court order.

The mother repeatedly failed to return the child, citing misinterpretations of COVID-19 health guidelines, despite negative tests and police intervention.

The court found the mother in contempt, satisfying the test beyond a reasonable doubt, noting her deliberate actions and disregard for court orders.

Despite the finding, no jail time or fines were imposed due to the mother's medical conditions and existing child protection prohibitions on her parenting time.

The court amended the parenting order, granting primary residence to the father and restricting the mother's contact and future litigation without leave.

The appellant mother, S. (D.), sought an order to extend the time to file a notice of appeal against a Crown wardship order for her three children.

The original order, making the children Crown wards with limited supervised access, was issued on April 24, 2017, and the appeal limitation period expired on May 24, 2017.

The motion for extension was filed nearly a year later.

The court applied the five-factor test from Issasi v. Rosenzweig, considering the appellant's intention to appeal, the length and explanation for delay, prejudice to the children, merits of the appeal, and the justice of the case.

The court found insufficient evidence of timely intention to appeal, an unreasonable delay, significant prejudice to the children's permanency planning, and a lack of merit in the proposed appeal.

Consequently, the motion to extend time was dismissed, emphasizing the imperative for expeditious resolution in child welfare matters and the best interests of the children.