Roy Frederick Olaf John Karlstedt

The Children's Aid Society sought findings of risk of physical harm, emotional harm, and emotional harm with treatment not provided under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act regarding two children.

The mother had a history of inappropriate physical discipline, verbal abuse, and failure to engage with professional services.

The father did not participate in the proceedings.

The court found that both children were in need of protection and ordered them into interim Society care for six months with access to the mother at the Society's discretion.

This decision addresses an application under sections 276 and 278.94 of the Criminal Code to determine the admissibility of evidence of a complainant's sexual activity in a sexual assault trial.

The accused sought to adduce evidence of prior consensual penetrative intercourse with the complainant to explain the presence of his DNA, and evidence of other male DNA found on the complainant to suggest an alternative perpetrator.

The court ruled that both types of evidence were admissible, with limitations, as they were relevant to issues at trial and had significant probative value not substantially outweighed by the danger of prejudice, after considering the factors in subsection 276(3).

The applicant brought a motion seeking child support and spousal support, while the respondent brought a motion seeking access to one of the children.

The respondent stood in the place of a parent to the applicant’s older child but argued that support should not be payable because the child’s biological father had a support obligation and because their relationship had broken down.

The court applied s. 5 of the Child Support Guidelines and held that, given the limited evidence regarding the biological father’s enforceable support obligation, the step-parent respondent should pay full guideline child support on an interim basis.

The court also awarded nominal interim spousal support based on the respondent’s limited ability to pay and adjusted the access schedule to maximize the child’s contact with the respondent while accommodating his work schedule.

A status review proceeding under the Child and Family Services Act involving six children of Ms. K. with two different biological fathers.

The Children's Aid Society sought to determine whether the children remained in need of protection.

Ms. K. sought custody of the S children and opposed the Society's involvement.

Mr. S. sought custody of the four S children and child support.

The court found that neither group of children remained in need of protection.

Custody of the S children was awarded to Mr. S., with no access granted to Ms. K. at that time.

The G children were returned to Ms. K.'s custody.

Child support was ordered.

The court declined to make a vexatious litigant order despite evidence of prolonged litigation.

The court granted a motion to change a child support order after finding a material change in circumstances caused by the moving party's workplace injury and resulting income shift.

The variation was made retroactive to January 1, 2006.

Income for support purposes was recalculated using allocated WSIB loss-of-earnings benefits, a 30% gross-up for non-taxable amounts, and limited inclusion of repayment shortfalls.

No additional income was imputed after April 19, 2011.

For the adult children's post-secondary costs, the court required each child to contribute 50% of available employment income and student loan resources, with the moving party responsible for the remaining balances and specified guideline support periods.

The court also ordered payment of historic section 7 dental expenses and left costs for further written submissions if not agreed.