2 total
The father was found in contempt for wilfully denying the mother's court-ordered access without legal justification.
The mother brought a contempt motion against the father for wilfully breaching a court-ordered access order by blocking her access to the parties' two children on November 14 and November 16, 2012.
The father claimed he was legally justified in denying access because the older child had allegedly been traumatized after seeing the mother's boyfriend in the apartment building on November 12, 2012.
The court found the father's evidence to be unreliable and contradicted by surveillance video, witness testimony, and the child's counselling report.
The court concluded that the father had fabricated his justification and was motivated by his dislike of the mother's boyfriend and his desire to undermine the mother-child relationship.
The court found the father in contempt of the access order without legal justification.
Father found in contempt for wilfully denying mother's court-ordered access without legal justification.
The applicant mother brought a motion for contempt against the respondent father for wilfully breaching a temporary access order by denying her access to their two children on two occasions.
The father argued he was legally justified because the children were traumatized after allegedly seeing the mother's boyfriend, who was restricted from being near them.
The court rejected the father's justification, noting his evidence completely changed after the mother produced video surveillance contradicting his initial claims.
The court found the father's actions were part of a campaign to undermine the mother's relationship with the children and found him in contempt beyond a reasonable doubt.
