Court File No 7/24
ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
Applicant: Kieran Alexander Delaurier Counsel: Iain Sneddon
Respondent: Courtney Ann Marie Beauchamp Counsel: Evgeny Parmut
ENDORSEMENT
M. Vickerd J.
1The Applicant has filed a 14B Motion, considered in chambers.
2The Applicant requests leave for Applicant’s counsel to attend virtually the Settlement Conference scheduled for May 4, 2026.
3At this time, there is no consent by the Respondent to this request.
4The reason provided by Applicant in the Affidavit sworn by a law clerk employed by Iain Sneddon is that Mr. Sneddon practices law in London (a travel time of one hour from the Sarnia courthouse). The law clerk deposes that for Mr. Sneddon to travel to Sarnia to participate in person at the conference would require “significant travel time” and result in unnecessary expense to the Applicant
5The Settlement Conference scheduled for next week was set on January 15, 2026, by endorsement of Justice Kowalyshyn and confirmed to occur “in person.”
6The Ontario Court of Justice Chief’s Directive on mode of appearances provides that settlement Conferences are directed to occur “ in-person, unless otherwise directed by a judge.”
7Rule 1 (7.3.1) of the Family Law Rules also includes considerations that the judiciary must consider when making an order for a matter to be heard by video or telephone. These are set out below:
(a) the availability of telephone or video technology and the access of the parties, witnesses and lawyers to it;
(b) the impact of delay in not using telephone or video technology, including on any applicable timelines, particularly if the case involves a child;
(c) the effect of using telephone or video technology on the court’s ability to make findings, including determinations about the credibility of witnesses;
(d) whether a party, witness or lawyer is unable to attend in person; and
(e) any other relevant matter. O. Reg. 152/21, s. 1 (2).
8In this matter, I have not received any evidence about how it is proposed that the Applicant will participate in the conference and whether he will have access to private conversations with his counsel.
9The sole focus of the Affidavit of Mr. Sneddon’s law clerk is the inconvenience to Mr. Sneddon and the cost to the Applicant. These issues do not outweigh the benefit of having both parties and counsel present at a Settlement Conference, ready to engage in meaningful and fulsome discussions and to be present for the negotiation and completion of Minutes of Settlement.
10Further, it seems unfair to allow Applicant’s counsel to attend virtually when the Respondent’s counsel must also travel from Toronto to attend in person. Also, both parties are required to attend in person.
11Furthermore, the travel time for counsel Sneddon of one hour is not so unreasonable to be persuasive.
12At today’s date, this case is 828 days old. The first Settlement Conference in this matter was convened on August 26, 2024. The matter has been adjourned since that date for various reasons including: preparation of the Minutes of Settlement; at the Applicant’s request for the purpose of allowing him an opportunity to retain counsel; for disclosure from service provider; and for the Applicant to file an Amended Form 35.1 document (ordered three times) and a Financial Statement. To date, the Applicant does not appear to have filed his amended complete Form 35.1 Affidavit. The Applicant has also not complied with the deadline set by Justice Kowalyshyn for Settlement Conference Briefs from the parties.
13Further delay is not in the best interests of the subject children. The best opportunity to resolve this proceeding is to have all parties and counsel present to do the work of negotiating the issues. The arrangement proposed would not be in the interests of justice nor support efficient case management.
14Given the foregoing, the request of the Applicant for leave for his counsel to attend the Settlement Conference set for May 4, 2026 virtually is dismissed. All parties and counsel are to attend the conference in person.
15Should the Applicant have not complied with the three orders for an amended and complete Form 35.1 Affidavit by the date of the conference, as well as other disclosure and brief ordered, the Respondent may seek remedies including costs and/or a striking of pleadings pursuant to Family Law Rule 1(8) and Rule 17.
Digitally signed by Justice Marnie Vickerd
Date: 2026.04.29