Mathew Fordjour

The father brought a motion to change a consent final order to seek primary residence and sole decision-making for the parties' younger child, alleging the mother had alienated the children from him.

The mother opposed the motion and sought sole decision-making.

The court held a voir dire and admitted the children's out-of-court statements to an OCL clinician and a reunification therapist under the principled approach to hearsay and the state of mind exception, rejecting a claim of case-by-case therapy privilege.

The court found no parental alienation by the mother.

The court dismissed the father's motion and granted the mother sole decision-making and primary residence, finding that the father had fabricated email evidence to mislead the court and that the child's strong preference was to reside with the mother and have parenting time at her discretion.

The applicant was successful on the respondent's motion and sought costs on a partial or substantial indemnity basis.

The court found that the applicant acted unreasonably by failing to respond to the respondent's suggestion to mediate, which was required by a prior court order.

Had the applicant responded positively, the motion would have been avoided.

Consequently, the court awarded the applicant a reduced lump sum of $1,000 in costs.