Lisa Denise Kathleen Johnson

This motion concerned the temporary care and custody of a child, O.C-J., under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act.

The Children's Aid Society of Toronto sought a temporary supervision order placing the child with the mother C.C-J., a position supported by C.C-J. herself, the child's aunt, and the child's counsel.

The other mother, S.C-J., sought placement with the aunt.

The court found that returning the child to S.C-J.'s care posed a risk of harm, given the child's expressed desire not to return and suicidal ideation.

The court determined that placing the child with C.C-J. under supervision was the least intrusive and most appropriate option, aligning with the child's wishes and mitigating identified risks, despite historical mental health concerns for C.C-J. and alienation fears raised by S.C-J.

This decision addresses the costs arising from a multi-year custody and access dispute between a maternal aunt (Applicant) and a temporary caregiver (Respondent Rikka Vescio) following the child's mother's death.

Although the main custody issue settled by consent, the litigation continued for 15 months over access, complicated by the child's immigration status and the aunt's adoption plans in the U.S. The court found the maternal aunt to be the successful party in the overall litigation and awarded her $25,000 in costs, finding the respondent's conduct in prolonging the litigation unreasonable, despite her not formally claiming costs in her initial pleadings.

The Children's Aid Society of Toronto brought a motion to vary a temporary care and custody order placing a three-year-old child with the maternal grandfather.

The motion was prompted by serious allegations of sexual abuse against the grandfather and domestic violence.

The maternal grandmother sought placement of the child in her care.

The court found a material change in circumstances and determined that placement with the society was in the child's best interests, citing the grandmother's lack of protective capacity, her historical pattern of abandonment, and her failure to disclose known abuse allegations to the society.

The defendant was charged with driving while disqualified contrary to section 259(4) of the Criminal Code and breach of recognizance contrary to section 145(3) of the Code following a traffic stop.

The defendant challenged the stop as an arbitrary detention in violation of sections 9 and 10 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The court found that the police lawfully stopped the vehicle based on a citizen complaint regarding solicitation at a liquor store, and that the defendant was not detained in the constitutional sense prior to arrest.

The court found no Charter breaches and convicted the defendant on both counts.

This is a costs decision following a two-day family law trial concerning custody, access, and child support.

The respondent mother was substantially successful on all issues, obtaining sole custody, a parenting schedule favoring her position, and child support of $1,172 per month based on imputed income of $80,000.

The applicant father opposed the costs award, arguing the mother's claim of $55,577 was excessive.

The court found the father acted in bad faith throughout the litigation, including disobeying court orders and engaging in non-disclosure and misrepresentation.

The mother served four offers to settle, all of which were rejected or ignored by the father.

The court awarded costs on a substantial indemnity basis, finding the father's conduct warranted full recovery of costs.

A family law trial concerning custody, access, and child support for two young children.

The father sought joint custody and 50-50 shared parenting, while the mother sought sole custody with restricted access.

The court found the father's conduct throughout the litigation to be deeply problematic, including verbal and emotional abuse of the mother, extensive non-disclosure of financial information, active misrepresentation to Canada Revenue Agency, and repeated violations of court orders.

The court awarded sole custody to the mother and restricted access to the father, while imputing income of $80,000 for child support purposes.