M. Segal

The applicant mother brought a motion to relocate with the parties' two children from Richmond Hill to St. Catharines.

The parties had a shared parenting arrangement.

The mother unilaterally moved to St. Catharines during the COVID-19 pandemic when schools were virtual.

The court applied the relocation provisions of the Divorce Act and found that the mother failed to meet her burden of proving the move was in the children's best interests, noting the significant impact the distance would have on the children and the father's parenting time.

The motion was dismissed, and the mother was ordered to return to within a 30-minute commute of the father's residence to maintain the shared parenting schedule.

The accused was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking after police executed a search warrant at his residence and conducted a warrantless search of his vehicle, finding cocaine in both locations.

The accused challenged the searches under s. 8 of the Charter.

The court upheld both searches, finding the warrant was supported by sufficient corroborated information from a confidential informant, and the vehicle search was validly incidental to arrest.

However, at trial, the accused raised an alternate suspect defence, pointing to his brother who lived with him and had access to the vehicle and residence.

The court found the brother lacked credibility but concluded the evidence raised a reasonable doubt as to whether the accused or his brother possessed the cocaine.

The accused was acquitted.

Following a jury conviction for second degree murder arising from a domestic homicide, the court determined the appropriate period of parole ineligibility.

The offender stabbed his common law spouse during a heated argument in their shared home, resulting in her death.

The court considered the statutory framework for second degree murder sentencing, including ss. 235(1), 745(c), and 745.4 of the Criminal Code, as well as general sentencing principles under ss. 718–718.2.

Mitigating factors included the offender’s lack of criminal record and the impulsive nature of the violence, while aggravating factors included the sudden lethal attack against an unarmed intimate partner and the breach of trust inherent in domestic relationships.

Balancing these factors and comparable case law, the court imposed a life sentence with a 12‑year period of parole ineligibility.