P. Sicco

The father was entirely successful at a trial regarding a motion to change, where the court found the mother engaged in a lengthy campaign of parental alienation.

The father sought costs of $213,436.28 on a full indemnity basis, relying on an offer to settle.

The mother argued for a reduced quantum of $97,465.00, citing her financial circumstances.

The court declined to award full indemnity costs but awarded substantial indemnity costs of $175,000.00, noting the mother's inappropriate conduct as a litigant, including violating a previous consent order and surreptitiously recording access exchanges.

The father brought a motion to change a final parenting order, seeking sole decision-making responsibility and primary residence of the 11-year-old child.

The court found overwhelming evidence that the mother had engaged in a consistent and long-term pattern of parental alienation and emotional abuse, severely damaging the child's relationship with the father.

Concluding that maintaining the status quo would be harmful, the court granted the motion, ordering the child to live with the father, granting him sole decision-making authority, and imposing a 90-day no-contact order between the child and the mother while the child undergoes reunification therapy.

The applicant mother brought a motion to suspend the respondent father's access to their child and to set aside a parenting coordinator's arbitration award.

The mother had unilaterally withheld access following an alleged incident where the father pushed the child, though police and child protection services closed their investigations without action.

The parenting coordinator ordered the resumption of access and make-up time.

The court dismissed the mother's motion, finding no reliable evidence to justify suspending access and no reasonable apprehension of bias or procedural unfairness in the arbitration award.

The father's cross-motion to enforce the award and resume access was granted.