Robert E. Stead

On a family law motion, the applicant sought to strike the respondent's answer for non-compliance with a prior disclosure order, amend her application to add a constructive trust claim against the respondent's pension, and obtain costs.

The amendment was granted on consent, and the disclosure issue became moot when an appraisal report was finally produced before the hearing.

The court held that a party cannot unilaterally decide that court-ordered valuation evidence is unnecessary, and found that the delay caused unnecessary expense and slowed the proceeding.

Costs of the motion were fixed in favour of the applicant.

The applicant brought a motion for interim spousal support following a 17‑year marriage, together with orders requiring the respondent to maintain extended health coverage and life insurance designation.

The respondent conceded entitlement but argued that support should fall below the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines due to delay in seeking support, the applicant’s relocation and employment decision, and his assumption of joint debts.

The court rejected these arguments, finding no prejudice from the delay, imputing income consistent with the applicant’s recent employment, and concluding that the respondent’s financial circumstances allowed support within the SSAG range.

Interim spousal support was ordered near the lower end of the SSAG range.

The applicant father brought an ex parte motion to enforce a prior interim custody order granting him custody of three children after the respondent mother failed to return them following weekend access.

The court found that the existing custody order remained in effect and that the respondent had not complied with its terms.

The father sought a police enforcement order directing authorities to apprehend and return the children.

The court granted the motion and authorized any police force in Ontario to apprehend the children and return them to the father in accordance with the prior custody order.