Paul R. Krumeh

The paternal grandmother brought a motion to be added as a party to a child protection proceeding concerning her grandchild, R. The Children's Aid Society and the mother opposed the motion, while the father supported it.

The court applied the legal principles for adding a party under subrule 7(5) of the Family Law Rules, considering the child's best interests, potential for delay, necessity to determine issues, viability of the grandmother's plan, and legal interest.

The court found that the mother had a viable plan supported by the society, adding the grandmother would cause undue delay and expose the child to further conflict, and the father could adequately present the grandmother's plan as a witness.

The motion was dismissed.

The applicant father sought temporary custody of twin children born in March 2015, with the respondent mother's access to be supervised.

The respondent sought to transfer the proceedings to Welland, Ontario, arguing the children's habitual residence was Crystal Beach where they had been moved with both parents.

The court found the mother consented to the father having care of the children and returning to Toronto, and that on a balance of convenience, the best evidence regarding the children was available in Ontario.

The court granted temporary custody to the father, with the mother having supervised day access in Toronto only, pending further evidence and a case conference.

The applicant father and respondent mother separated in 2005.

In 2009, the father applied for a divorce and an order to pay child support.

In 2011, the mother amended her answer to claim retroactive child support from the date of separation to 2009.

The court applied the D.B.S. framework and found that the mother had not provided effective notice until 2009, the father had made voluntary contributions post-separation, and a retroactive award would cause hardship to the father's new family.

The claim for retroactive child support was dismissed, and costs of $2,500 were awarded to the applicant father.

The appellant teacher appealed a decision of the Fitness to Practise Committee revoking his teaching certificate due to incapacity.

The Committee relied on a provisional psychiatric diagnosis of delusional disorder based on a document review, as the appellant refused to attend a psychiatric assessment or the final days of his hearing.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the expert evidence was admissible and the Committee's decision was reasonable.

The Court also found no breach of procedural fairness, noting the appellant waived his right to complain by choosing not to attend the hearing.