Krista Jane Fortier

The respondent brought a motion seeking the partition and sale of the former matrimonial home prior to trial and the return of personal items.

The applicant opposed, arguing prejudice to her family law claims and disputing ownership of some items.

The court granted the order for partition and sale, with net proceeds to be held in trust, finding no unfair prejudice to the applicant's family law claims given the trust arrangement.

The court also ordered the return of most personal items, deferring the dispute over two specific pictures to trial.

The respondent mother, S.M.L., sought leave to bring a status review application for her child, Z., who had been in extended society care and with the same foster parents for over two years.

The court applied the five-part test from Catholic Children's Aid of Metro Toronto v. B.A.F., which requires the applicant to demonstrate bona fide intent, that relief cannot be obtained otherwise, unusual circumstances, that the review would accomplish the Act's purposes, and a prima facie case.

The court found that the mother failed to establish unusual circumstances (as a parent's improvement alone is not unusual) and failed to establish a prima facie case, primarily due to ongoing instability in her life and the significant disruption it would cause to the special needs child's established stability and attachment with the foster parents.

The application for leave was dismissed, prioritizing the child's best interests and permanency.

This decision addresses cross-motions for interim custody, access, and child support.

The Mother sought sole custody, while the Father sought joint or shared custody with primary residence with him.

The court found the Mother was the primary caregiver before separation and was better able to provide consistent care due to her proximity to the children's school and stable work schedule.

The Father's unilateral decisions, lack of transparency regarding his new living arrangements, and disrespectful communication with the Mother raised serious concerns about his ability to prioritize the children's best interests.

The court rejected the Father's "status quo" argument, finding the current arrangement was unilaterally imposed.

Sole custody was granted to the Mother, with defined access for the Father and child support orders.