Piotr Szajak

Following competing family law motions regarding custody and access, the court determined the issue of costs.

Applying Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules, the court found the respondent was substantially successful in obtaining expanded parenting time including overnight access, telephone access, and shared holidays.

Although both parties made offers to settle, neither met the strict requirements for enhanced cost consequences under Rule 18(14), though they remained relevant to the court’s discretion.

The court considered proportionality, the importance of the parenting issues, the reasonableness of counsel’s rates, and concerns about excessive time spent by the respondent’s legal team.

Costs were awarded to the respondent but significantly reduced from the amount sought.

The respondent father brought a motion seeking expanded parenting time, including overnight access, with the parties’ young child.

The applicant mother opposed the expansion and brought a cross‑motion seeking dismissal of the motion, temporary custody, and other relief, arguing that the child was not comfortable with overnight visits and required stability.

An Office of the Children’s Lawyer report recommended gradual expansion of parenting time leading eventually to overnight visits, although no timeline had been established.

The court found no evidence suggesting that overnight parenting time with the father posed any risk to the child and concluded that progression toward overnights was in the child’s best interests despite the high conflict between the parties.

A staged schedule was ordered gradually expanding the father’s time to include overnights and alternating weekends, while custody was left to be determined at trial.