Ms. K. Junger

This motion concerned a father's urgent request to enforce a pre-existing time-sharing arrangement for his five-year-old son, Zachary, during the COVID-19 pandemic, which the mother had suspended due to concerns about the child's asthma and the father's essential worker status.

The mother brought a cross-motion to formally suspend the father's in-person access.

The court deemed the matter urgent due to the prolonged denial of access.

The court dismissed the mother's motion to suspend access, finding that the father's detailed adherence to COVID-19 safety protocols as an essential service plumber was sufficient to mitigate risks, and that maintaining physical contact was in the child's best interest.

The court also dismissed the father's motion for a finding of contempt against the mother and his request for timelines to initiate a motion to change custody.

The existing time-sharing order was reinstated, and the father was granted make-up access time, with both parents ordered to strictly follow public health guidelines.

The Respondent Father brought an urgent motion seeking an order to change the child's primary residence to his care, citing two instances where the child left the Applicant Mother's home.

The Applicant Mother brought a cross-motion for therapeutic reconciliation and other relief.

The court, operating under COVID-19 restrictions, first determined the urgency of the motions.

The court struck three exhibits from the Applicant's affidavit for being unhelpful, unreliable, or improper.

Ultimately, the court found that urgency had not been established for either motion, as the child was not at risk and the incidents had been resolved.

Both the Respondent's motion and the Applicant's cross-motion were dismissed, maintaining the status quo.

The court also provided directions for the parties to bring a future "Motion in Writing" to determine professional assistance for custody and access issues.