Urgent motion for temporary joint custody dismissed due to recent property damage incident and lack of parenting plan.
The moving party mother brought an urgent motion for temporary joint custody of the parties' three-year-old child during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The parties had separated and shared parenting time until an incident where the mother damaged the father's home and was charged with mischief, resulting in a non-communication order.
The court found the mother's evidence regarding the incident and her proposed parenting plan lacking.
The court dismissed the motion for joint custody, ordered that the child's primary residence remain temporarily with the father, and adjourned the issue of the mother's parenting time to allow for further evidence regarding her work schedule.
Substantially successful party received fixed costs after family trial.
This was a family law costs endorsement following a trial involving custody, access, spousal support, child support, occupation rent, and property equalization.
The court applied s. 131 of the Courts of Justice Act and Rules 24 and 18(16) of the Family Law Rules, finding the applicant achieved substantial success on most contested issues and that her offer to settle was materially more reasonable.
The court also found the respondent's conduct, particularly on property division, increased trial time and costs unnecessarily.
After reducing disbursements for an unused expert report, the court fixed costs in the applicant's favour at $40,500 inclusive of HST and disbursements.
