O. Khan

The applicant mother brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a final order for sole custody and specified access based on a settlement reached at a settlement conference.

The respondent father opposed the motion, denying an agreement was reached and arguing that the Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) recommendations were vague and circumstances had changed.

The court found that an enforceable agreement was reached at the settlement conference and that there were no genuine issues requiring a trial.

The court granted the summary judgment motion, awarding sole custody to the mother and specified access to the father in accordance with the OCL recommendations, finding it to be in the best interests of the child.

The respondent wife brought a motion for the sale of the jointly owned matrimonial home prior to trial.

The applicant husband opposed the sale, arguing he had a competing interest under the Family Law Act because the wife would owe him an equalization payment greater than her share of the home's equity, based on his payment of carrying costs and a larger initial down payment.

The court found no legal basis for a notional credit for the down payment on a jointly owned asset and noted the husband's carrying costs could be offset by occupation rent.

The court concluded the husband failed to establish a competing interest, that a sale would not prejudice his rights, and that the wife's motion was not oppressive.

The motion for sale was granted, and the wife was awarded full recovery costs.

Following a family law motion involving requests to set aside a separation agreement, pursue equalization, and address child and spousal support, the parties reached temporary minutes of settlement increasing child support and adjourning other issues.

The respondent sought costs of $7,500 on a partial indemnity basis for preparation addressing limitation issues and the attempt to set aside the separation agreement.

The court found that significant preparation by the respondent related to issues that could not properly be determined on a short motion and that were effectively abandoned for the motion hearing.

Considering the limited success of the applicant and the access to justice concerns surrounding unresolved support and equalization issues, the court awarded partial costs to the respondent.

Costs were made payable upon determination or settlement of the outstanding issues unless the applicant abandoned her claims earlier.