M. Edwards

The applicant mother brought the parties' child from Quebec to Ontario without notice, alleging coercive control and extreme COVID-19 isolation by the respondent father.

She sought to have the Ontario Superior Court assume jurisdiction over parenting matters under s. 23 of the Children's Law Reform Act, arguing the child would suffer serious harm if returned.

The court declined to assume jurisdiction, finding that s. 23 is intended for international cases involving non-signatories to the Hague Convention, not domestic inter-provincial disputes where the Quebec Superior Court is equally bound to consider the child's best interests.

The application was stayed pending a decision from the Quebec court on whether it would decline jurisdiction.

The applicant brought a motion to compel the sale of a jointly owned property in the context of ongoing family litigation.

The respondent opposed the sale, arguing it would be contrary to the children's best interests and that she wished to purchase the applicant's interest if successful in her equitable claims at trial.

The court granted the motion, finding that the property was not the principal residence of either party, the applicant was incurring significant carrying costs, and the sale would not negatively impact the children.

The court ordered the property sold and the net proceeds paid into court.

The plaintiff moved to vary a timetable order and extend the date to set the action down for trial, while the defendant brought a cross-motion to dismiss the action for delay.

The action had previously been dismissed for delay and restored with a strict timetable, which the plaintiff breached.

The court found the plaintiff's delay in producing an expert report on damages was intentional, contumelious, and largely unexplained, exacerbated by the undisclosed destruction of their financial records prior to commencing the action.

The plaintiff's motion was dismissed, and the defendant's motion to dismiss the action for delay was granted.