R. Sleightholm

The plaintiff brought a motion for leave to issue a writ of seizure and sale, a notice of garnishment, and a tracing order to enforce a 2013 judgment.

The court established a timetable on consent and scheduled the motion to be heard on August 31, 2021.

The applicant wife brought an urgent motion for interim spousal support.

The wife, who was on long-term disability, sought support based on the husband's income as a police officer and his retained corporate earnings.

The court found the wife had established a prima facie entitlement to support based on need and the husband's ability to pay.

The court imputed the husband's income at $170,000, including base salary, overtime, and corporate retained earnings, and ordered interim spousal support of $3,500 per month retroactive to February 2020.

The applicant mother sought an order permitting her to relocate with the parties' child from Halton Region to London, Ontario, to live with her fiancé.

The respondent father opposed the move, arguing it would negatively impact his relationship with the child.

The court found that a material change in circumstances had occurred and that the move was in the child's best interests, as it would provide financial stability, greater educational support, and more quality time with the mother.

The mother was permitted to relocate with the child, subject to a specified access schedule for the father.