Pritina Bhavsar

The Applicant Father brought a motion to alter an interim parenting order regarding custody and access, alleging new instances of the Respondent Mother's inappropriate discipline and alienation.

The Respondent Mother also brought a motion for spousal and child support.

The court dismissed the Father's motion to alter the existing interim parenting order, finding he failed to demonstrate "compelling reasons" for a change, and that the evidence presented, including CAS notes, was not sufficiently reliable at an interim stage.

The court emphasized the need for stability for children and that such issues should be determined at trial.

The court also set out interim access arrangements for the Mother following the impending sale of the matrimonial home, contingent on her securing suitable accommodation.

The respondent sought to vary a temporary child and spousal support order on the basis of a material change in circumstances.

The respondent had been ordered to pay support based on imputed income of $86,000 annually as a car salesman.

He subsequently obtained new employment at a lower salary of $60,000 annually, claiming he chose the position to spend more time with the children.

The court dismissed the motion to vary, finding that the respondent had not established changed circumstances sufficient to overcome the res judicata effect of the imputed income determination.

The court held that a parent's obligation to support children at the level they are capable of earning takes precedence over personal choices regarding work-life balance.