Mr. Justice T.A. Platana

The applicant birth mother sought access to her biological child, who had been adopted by the applicant's mother and stepfather.

The court considered whether the applicant had standing to apply for access under section 21 of the Children's Law Reform Act, given the prohibition in section 160(1) of the Child and Family Services Act.

The court found that the applicant did not meet the exceptional circumstances required to override the statutory prohibition, as she had not established a sufficient post-adoptive relationship or received assurances of continued contact.

The application for standing was dismissed.

Following a trial on child and spousal support where the respondent was successful in resisting the applicant's claim to impute income, the court determined the issue of costs.

The applicant argued for divided success, but the court found the respondent was the successful party on the focal issue.

After considering the offers to settle, the reasonableness of the parties' behaviour, and the travel costs claimed for out-of-town counsel, the court awarded the respondent costs fixed at $30,000 for fees and $5,000 for disbursements, plus HST.

The plaintiff, a teacher's aide, slipped and fell at a municipally run daycare located in a school.

The WSIB brought a subrogated claim against the landlord school board.

The school board brought a third-party claim against the tenant municipality for contribution and indemnity under their lease agreement.

Both parties brought motions to determine questions of law regarding the lease's insurance and indemnity clauses.

The court found that the tenant had contractually assumed the risk of damages arising from the maintenance of the premises and was required to defend and indemnify the landlord school board.

The parties separated after a five-year relationship.

They agreed to shared custody of their two children.

The applicant mother, a full-time teacher, sought to impute income to the respondent father, arguing he was intentionally underemployed as a supply teacher.

The court declined to impute income, finding the father's pursuit of a full-time teaching career reasonable despite the delay caused by hiring regulations.

Applying the Contino framework for shared custody, the court ordered the mother to pay $750 monthly in child support.

The court also awarded the father $250 monthly in spousal support on compensatory and non-compensatory grounds, recognizing his career sacrifices to care for the children during the marriage.

Following resolution of the divorce, custody, and child support issues, the trial addressed the respondent spouse's remaining claims for spousal support, equalization, and possession of the home.

The court found the respondent failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the applicant held undisclosed assets personally, held beneficial interests in corporate or trust property, or that the home registered in the applicant's mother's name formed part of divisible family property.

The court also declined to impute income beyond the applicant's disclosed $36,000 annual income because the allegations of hidden mining and gravel income were unsupported by admissible evidence.

Applying the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines with child support, the court found no spousal support payable.

All remaining claims in the answer were dismissed, with no order as to costs.