R. Zisman

The applicant father brought a motion to change the primary residence of his 12-year-old son from the respondent mother's home to his own.

The child had consistently expressed a strong desire to live with his father for almost three years.

The court found that the mature adolescent's clear and consistent wishes constituted a material change in circumstances.

Applying the best interests of the child test, the court granted the motion, allowing the child to relocate to the father's primary care while maintaining joint custody and generous access for the mother.

The accused was tried on charges of assault, assault causing bodily harm, and sexual assault against his spouse.

The case turned primarily on credibility, as the complainant was the only Crown witness and the accused denied all allegations while calling his mother as a defence witness.

Applying the W.(D.) credibility framework, the court rejected the accused’s testimony as inconsistent and implausible, and found the complainant’s evidence reliable despite delayed reporting and inconsistencies related to her extramarital affair.

The court concluded that the accused assaulted the complainant in July 2008, caused bodily harm by beating her in August 2008 resulting in a fractured tailbone, and later forced anal intercourse without consent.

The accused was convicted on all three counts.

Following a trial where the self-represented applicant was successful in obtaining access to his biological child, he sought costs.

The court awarded the applicant costs on a partial indemnity basis, including compensation for lost wages due to trial preparation and attendance, as well as disbursements for a paternity test and a parenting assessment.

The respondents were ordered to pay $18,392.90.