Ruchelle Heckburn

The parties separated in 2020 after an 11-year marriage, resulting in a high-conflict parenting dispute over their three children.

The applicant father sought sole decision-making and primary residence, while the respondent mother sought the same.

The court found the applicant had engaged in a pattern of alienating behaviour and exaggerated claims about the respondent's mental health.

The court ordered a shared parenting schedule, increasing the respondent's parenting time to approximately 43 percent, while leaving final decision-making with the applicant subject to a duty to consult.

The court also imputed income to both parties ($85,000 to the applicant, $52,000 to the respondent) due to intentional underemployment, ordered the respondent to pay retroactive child support, and ordered the applicant to pay prospective child support.

Spousal support entitlement was found but quantum was set at zero.

The parties disputed a claimed retroactive downward variation of child support, the structure of resumed parenting time with the younger child, and whether the mother required the father's travel consent for international vacations.

Applying the retroactive support framework, the court held the payor failed to prove a real, significant, and continuous material decrease in income, finding the medical evidence insufficient and the non-employment effectively a matter of choice.

On parenting, the court found a material change arising from the lack of consistent visits and ordered a gradual transition of day visits before restoring alternate weekend parenting time with the younger child only.

On travel, the court held the father's refusal to consent to a one-week vacation was unreasonable and varied the prior order to permit international vacation travel of up to two weeks outside school time without his authorization, subject to itinerary disclosure and make-up parenting time.