Michael McKee

The defendant appealed a Master's order granting the plaintiffs leave to amend their statement of claim.

The proposed amendment alleged that a trust agreement concerning a residential property was void because it violated the common law Rule Against Perpetuities by failing to specify a time frame for legal title to vest.

The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding that the Master erred in law by failing to determine if the pleading was legally tenable.

The court held that under sections 3 and 4 of the Perpetuities Act, the contingent interest was presumptively valid and subject to a 'wait and see' approach, making the plaintiffs' proposed amendment impossible of success and legally untenable.

The mother sought sole custody and permission to relocate with the parties' two-year-old child from Ontario to California.

The mother, a US citizen, had been isolated during the marriage and had no financial prospects or family support in Ontario.

The father sought sole custody but provided no clear plan and his evidence was found to be unreliable.

The court granted the mother sole custody, finding she was the primary caregiver and a better decision-maker.

Applying the Gordon v. Goertz framework, the court permitted the relocation to California, noting the mother's sound plan for financial self-sufficiency and the emotional benefits to both her and the child.

The court also dispensed with the father's consent for travel and government documents.