Rasim Misheal

On competing family law motions concerning a child’s medical care and dietary management, the court found a material change in circumstances based on escalating parental conflict and ongoing medical uncertainty affecting effective decision-making.

The court held that the dietary term in prior Minutes of Settlement remained binding unless varied, and that unilateral non-compliance was impermissible despite disagreement about continued necessity.

Applying best-interests principles under the Divorce Act and Children’s Law Reform Act, the court ordered an interim framework requiring continued gluten- and dairy-free compliance, detailed dietary/symptom tracking, and coordinated physician-led referrals through the child’s family doctor.

The child was ordered to remain on a tertiary clinic wait list pending medical recommendations or further order.

Both the motion and cross-motion were granted in part, with all other relief dismissed and no costs awarded.

The Children's Aid Society of the Niagara Region brought a motion to dispense with service on the respondent mother in a child protection proceeding.

The child had been removed from the mother's care on October 25, 2024, and placed in the Society's care.

The Society argued that despite numerous attempts to locate and serve the mother—including phone calls, contact with family members, probation services, newspaper advertisements, and outreach to the alleged father—all efforts had been futile.

The mother had not attended court appearances or exercised access to the child.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the Society had not met the stringent requirements under Rule 6(16) of the Family Law Rules to dispense with service.