Raja Irfan Aziz

The respondent mother brought a motion seeking to vary a child support order to reflect the applicant father's actual income retroactively, for spousal support retroactive to June 1, 2015, to vary daycare expense sharing retroactively, for disclosure of rental property leases, and for costs.

The court granted the variations for child support and daycare expenses based on the father's actual income, ordered retroactive spousal support, and ordered the father to provide further disclosure regarding his rental properties.

The court found the respondent had made a prima facie case for interim spousal support and rejected the applicant's hardship argument given his property acquisitions.

Following a motion determining that a child was habitually resident in Quebec and that Ontario lacked jurisdiction over custody and access, the court addressed costs.

The successful party sought costs on either a partial or substantial indemnity basis under Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules.

The court applied the presumption that the successful party is entitled to costs and considered the factors in Rule 24(11), including complexity, conduct of the parties, and time spent.

Finding the issue required court intervention but involved no unreasonable behaviour, the court awarded modest partial indemnity costs.