The applicant brought a motion seeking multiple forms of relief, including an order that a different judge be seized of the case, a restraining order preventing contact between the respondent's eldest daughter and the applicant's children, an order for supervised access between the applicant's children and the respondent, and various orders regarding Children's Aid Society files and sealing of court records.
The respondent opposed the motion.
The court dismissed most of the applicant's requests, finding that the applicant was engaged in judge shopping and that there was no credible evidence supporting her allegations of sexual abuse.
The court granted an order for bi-weekly supervised sibling access visits between the children and the respondent's eldest daughters at a supervised access centre.