Sage Harvey

The applicant father brought a motion for summary judgment to reduce his child support obligations and arrears, as well as his life insurance obligations, under a 2012 separation agreement.

He argued his income had decreased due to job loss following a period of incarceration.

The respondent mother opposed the motion, arguing the applicant misrepresented his income when the agreement was signed and that genuine issues required a trial.

The court dismissed the motion, finding the applicant failed to provide full financial disclosure and that a trial was necessary to determine the proper interpretation of the separation agreement and the applicant's actual income.

A trial concerning access and relocation issues involving twin children born in 2013.

The father sought to establish meaningful access with the children following separation from the mother.

The mother sought permission to relocate with the children to Niagara Falls.

The court found that the mother had engaged in a course of conduct to alienate the children from the father and had failed to actively encourage their relationship despite repeatedly stating she wished them to have contact.

The court permitted the relocation but ordered therapeutic reintegration services and maintained the father's access rights, finding the mother had not complied with her obligations as custodial parent to facilitate the father-child relationship.

This is a costs endorsement following a focused trial in which the respondent (father) sought to prohibit the applicant (mother) from changing the names of their three children.

The court dismissed the father's claim and awarded costs to the successful mother.

The mother sought $1,356 in costs while the father submitted costs should be fixed at $500.

The court fixed costs at $1,000 inclusive of fees, disbursements and HST, payable in monthly installments of $200 commencing November 1, 2017.

The respondent father sought an order prohibiting the applicant mother from changing the surnames of their three children from Kiarie to Hermanson-Kiarie, and from adding a middle name to the youngest child.

The parties had resolved all parenting and financial issues and agreed to a focused hearing on this remaining matter.

The court considered whether prohibiting the name change was in the children's best interests under the Children's Law Reform Act, applying established jurisprudential factors.

The court found that the mother was acting in good faith and that the proposed name change was in the children's best interests, particularly given practical difficulties the mother faced as a mixed-race parent with a different surname from her children.

The court granted the mother permission to change the children's names as proposed, subject to a prohibition on any further changes without the father's written consent.

The applicant, an unsuccessful candidate in a 2014 municipal election, failed to file an audited financial statement by the statutory deadline, resulting in her ineligibility to run in the next municipal election.

Almost two years later, she sought relief from forfeiture under s. 98 of the Courts of Justice Act to permit late filing and removal from the "Candidates in Default" list, primarily to secure a provincial party nomination.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate that her non-compliance was inadvertent or that she had been sufficiently diligent in attempting to remedy the breach.

The court emphasized the importance of timely financial disclosure for public policy and declined to exercise its equitable discretion.

The appellant moved for a stay of a motion judge's order regarding reintegration reconciliation counselling and the adjournment of her summary judgment motion.

The respondent brought a cross-motion to quash the appeal, arguing the underlying order was interlocutory.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the respondent, finding that the issue of access remained to be determined at a future summary judgment motion.

The appeal was quashed and costs were awarded to the respondent.