K. Sah

The applicant brought a motion for interim child and spousal support following the parties' separation.

The respondent claimed inability to pay and disputed entitlement.

The court found the applicant established a prima facie case for spousal support based on her need and the length of the marriage.

Due to inconsistencies in the respondent's financial disclosure and reported expenses far exceeding his reported income, the court imputed his income at $142,598 based on the average of his reported yearly expenses.

Interim child support and spousal support were ordered to commence following the sale of the matrimonial home.

The respondent sought costs of $4,898.55 on a substantial indemnity basis after successfully defeating the applicant's motion for the trial judge's recusal.

The applicant, a self-represented mother, claimed an inability to pay.

The court noted significant deficiencies in the respondent's bill of costs, including a failure to break down hours spent specifically on the recusal motion.

Applying principles of proportionality and reasonableness, the court fixed costs at $600 payable by the applicant to the respondent.

The applicant sought to confirm and enforce a provisional child support order made in the United Kingdom against the respondent residing in Ontario.

The court found there was insufficient evidence on the record to determine whether the provisional order should be confirmed, particularly regarding retroactive support.

The court adjourned the matter and ordered the respondent to file the required financial forms and tax returns, and permitted the applicant to file a reply affidavit.

The applicant father brought a motion for costs under rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules, alleging the respondent mother breached multiple terms of a prior order regarding virtual parenting time.

The court found the mother's evidence unreliable, relying on previous findings of her manipulative and alienating behaviour.

The court concluded the mother breached several provisions by undermining the father's parenting time, failing to ensure the children were visible, and failing to document and address the children's resistance.

The court ordered the mother to pay $10,000 in costs as a sanction and incentive for future compliance.