CITATION: N.S. v. R.M., 2021 ONSC 4814
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 024/21
DATE: 20210707
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
Swinton, Akbarali and Favreau JJ.
BETWEEN:
N.S.
Applicant/Respondent on Appeal
– and –
R.M.
Respondent/Appellant
COUNSEL:
François Kabemba, for the Applicant/Respondent on Appeal
Gordon S. Campbell, for the Respondent/Appellant
HEARD: in writing
SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS
Akbarali J.
[1] On June 28, 2021, this court released reasons allowing the appellant father’s appeal in part: N.S. v. R.M., 2021 ONSC 4566. In particular, the court allowed the father’s appeal with respect to parenting time, and ordered a parenting schedule that provides the children with more time with the father going forward, in part by increasing the time the children spend with the father during the holidays. This court dismissed the father’s appeal from the trial judge’s determinations of decision-making, relocation, and costs.
[2] Under the parenting schedule ordered, the children will spend five weeks each summer with the father. However, because the summer of 2021 is already upon us, and neither party had made submissions about an appropriate parenting schedule this summer, the court sought further submissions on that issue, which have now been received. These supplementary reasons deal with parenting time for the children in the summer of 2021 only.
[3] The father’s submission is that the children should spend five weeks with him this summer, consistent with the final parenting time schedule the court has ordered. However, he has very little, if any, information about the children’s plans for the summer, so he leaves the matter to the court’s discretion.
[4] For her part, the respondent mother argues that the trial judge’s decision provided the father with a week in the summer, and he made no effort to schedule it. She says it is too late now. The children have plans to be in day camps every week of the summer except for a ten-day period when she plans to take them to Alberta.
[5] The mother attaches receipts for the camps and her trip to Alberta. I note that she has provided nothing that demonstrates when the trip to Alberta was booked, and no explanation as to the purpose of the trip, or why she is travelling with the children to Alberta during a pandemic.
[6] Moreover, while the children are apparently participating in an ice skating camp over five weeks this summer, I have some concerns about the documentation the mother has provided to support their enrollment in this camp. Unlike the other camps for which she has provided documentation, there is no receipt for the ice skating camps that show the cost of the camp, or when she enrolled the children in the camp. Rather, the mother has produced a letter “sans prejudice” from Isatis Sport dated June 30, 2021 – two days after this court’s reasons were released – confirming that the children are registered for five weeks of camp. The letter is a highly unusual form of camp confirmation or receipt, and causes me concern that the mother may have enrolled the children in ice skating camp after this court’s reasons were released, in an effort to frustrate the intent of the court’s decision.
[7] The mother’s attitude towards time for the children with the father this summer is concerning. Despite this court finding that it is in the best interests of the children to spend more time with their father, the mother demonstrates no flexibility, and makes no parenting time proposal that would provide the children with meaningful time with the father this summer. Rather, she argues that keeping the children in all their camps provides them with stability. She demonstrates no recognition of, or respect for, the importance of the father’s role in the children’s lives. This is consistent with the concerns noted by the trial judge, and this court, that the mother has acted to minimize the father’s involvement with the children.
[8] Moreover, it is not correct to say that the father has made no request for time with the children this summer. The father was pursuing his appeal, in which he clearly sought, and was awarded, additional parenting time with the children.
[9] Consistent with this court’s decision increasing the father’s parenting time, it is in the children’s best interests that they spend time with the father rather than go to day camp for every week this summer apart from a ten-day trip to Alberta.
[10] In my view, the following parenting schedule best balances the children’s pre-planned activities, their ability to travel with the mother to Alberta, and their need to have time with the father. Except as otherwise provided, I order that the schedule below supercedes the regular parenting schedule:
a. The regular parenting schedule shall continue until July 16, 2021;
b. The father shall have the children in his care from July 17, 2021 at 10 a.m. to July 24, 2021 at 5 p.m.;
c. The mother shall have the children in her care from July 24, 2021 at 5 p.m. to July 31, 2021 at 10 a.m.;
d. The father shall have the children in his care from July 31, 2021 at 10 a.m. to August 14, 2021 at 5 p.m.;
e. The mother shall have the children in her care from August 14, 2021 at 5 p.m. to September 3, 2021 at 6 p.m.;
f. During the period from July 17, 2021 to September 3, 2021, the Skype, telephone or Facetime access ordered by the trial judge shall continue, except that the parent entitled to exercise the access shall be the parent who does not have the children in his or her care;
g. The regular schedule shall resume on September 3, 2021 at 6 p.m. The children shall be in the father’s care during September 3, 2021 weekend pursuant to the regular schedule.
[11] I note that the mother will have to cancel three weeks of camp in order to facilitate the father’s parenting time in the summer of 2021. I am not convinced that the skating camps were booked before the court’s reasons were released in any event. The other week of camp that must be cancelled was booked for the children two days before the father’s appeal was heard. The children will benefit more from time with their father than by attending these late-booked camps.
[12] I recognize that the schedule above provides the father with less than five weeks of parenting time in the summer of 2021. However, it is in the children’s best interests because it balances their different needs and commitments, and provides for a step-up parenting schedule in the summer of 2021 to allow the children to adjust to spending greater amounts of time with their father.
J.T. Akbarali J.
I agree _______________________________
K. Swinton J.
I agree _______________________________
L. Favreau J.
Released: July 07, 2021
CITATION: N.S. v. R.M., 2021 ONSC 4814
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 024/21
DATE: 20210707
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
Swinton, Akbarali and Favreau JJ.
BETWEEN:
N.S.
Applicant/Respondent on Appeal
– and –
R.M.
Respondent/Appellant
Supplementary REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Akbarali J.
Released: July 07, 2021