Theodore Michael Charuk

During the COVID-19 court suspension, the father brought an urgent motion alleging his 8-year-old son expressed suicidal ideation due to unhappiness at the mother's residence.

The mother disputed the urgency, characterizing the child as "normal, happy." The Triage Judge found the allegations potentially urgent, emphasizing the need for prompt investigation in serious child welfare matters.

The court set an expedited schedule for responding materials and a teleconference hearing to formally determine urgency and make necessary orders.

This is a costs endorsement following an eight-day trial primarily concerning custody and access in a mobility context.

The Respondent was successful at trial, having met or exceeded her Offer to Settle, which presumptively entitled her to costs.

The Respondent sought full recovery costs of $35,206.50.

The Applicant argued for no costs or nominal costs, citing the inherent difficulty of mobility cases and his precarious financial circumstances.

The Court found the Respondent's conduct was not unreasonable and that success was not divided.

However, considering the unique challenges of mobility disputes, the Applicant's reasonable pursuit of the status quo, and his precarious financial situation, the Court exercised its discretion under Rule 24(11)(f) to mitigate the costs award.

Addendum to a family law judgment clarifying additional terms relating to parenting access, reimbursement of mediation and legal consultation fees, transfer of a motor vehicle, and continuation of benefits coverage.

The court confirmed that access would proceed in accordance with previously agreed Minutes of Settlement.

The applicant was ordered to reimburse the respondent for mediation costs and potentially legal consultation fees if undisputed.

The applicant was also directed to transfer his interest in a vehicle to the respondent and to maintain benefit coverage for the children and the respondent until the divorce was finalized.