Nakonechny

The applicant father brought a motion to vary a parenting order, seeking interim primary residence and supervised parenting time for the mother, following an incident in Florida where the mother was arrested for child neglect due to severe intoxication.

The mother sought to maintain the status quo and requested a section 30 assessment.

The court struck several exhibits from the mother's affidavits, including letters from a nurse practitioner and psychiatrist, for failing to comply with expert evidence rules.

The court found a material change in circumstances and granted the father interim primary residence.

The court declined to order supervised parenting time but required the mother to use Soberlink alcohol monitoring during her parenting time.

The father's child support obligations were suspended, and the mother's request for a section 30 assessment was dismissed.

The applicant wife brought a motion seeking financial disclosure and a valuation of the respondent husband's interest in a corporation as of the date of separation.

The husband argued the asset was excluded property gifted by his father and that a formal valuation was disproportionate to its value, which he claimed was equal to the dividends he received.

The court held that the husband had the onus to provide credible evidence of the asset's value and ordered him to retain a Chartered Business Valuator at his own expense, noting that the issue of whether the asset was excluded remained in dispute.

The applicant sought an equalization of net family properties, a declaration of a bare trust regarding a property, and retroactive child support in an uncontested trial.

The court dismissed the bare trust claim, finding no certainty of intention.

The court ordered the respondent to pay an equalization payment of $65,444 and retroactive child support of $14,229 based on an imputed income of $40,000 due to his failure to provide financial disclosure.

Costs of $10,000 were awarded to the applicant.