S. Arnold

The respondent father was successful in obtaining a temporary order for equal parenting time and sought costs of the motion.

The father had made an offer to settle for equal parenting time, while the applicant mother's offers were premised on unequal parenting time.

The court awarded the father costs of $3,400, representing approximately 70% of his actual costs, noting his reasonable offers to settle.

The court also ordered that the mother's payment of costs be deferred pending the determination of her claim for child support arrears.

The applicant mother brought a motion to change a final consent order regarding parenting time.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the mother unilaterally reduced the respondent father's parenting time to weekends.

The father sought a temporary order returning to the pre-pandemic equal parenting schedule.

The mother opposed, citing the children's special needs and their recent progress at school.

The court granted the father's request for equal parenting time, finding it in the children's best interests, but granted the mother temporary sole responsibility for educational and health care decisions to reduce conflict.

The accused, charged with first-degree murder, brought an application to adduce evidence of a third-party suspect.

The defence sought to call witnesses and introduce video surveillance to establish that another resident of the victim's building had animus, motive, and opportunity to commit the murder.

The court applied the McMillan test and found that the proposed evidence established a sufficient connection between the third party and the crime.

The application was granted, as the probative value of the evidence outweighed its slight prejudicial effect.

The applicant, a municipal councillor charged with assaulting the deputy mayor, sought to vary his bail conditions to permit him to attend town council meetings.

His original bail conditions included a no-contact order with the victim and witnesses, and prohibited him from attending the town hall.

The applicant argued that his inability to attend meetings for three successive months would result in the loss of his council seat under the Municipal Act.

The court found that his unrestricted attendance posed an unacceptable risk to the victim and witnesses.

However, to prevent the automatic loss of his seat, the court granted a limited variation allowing him to attend one specific meeting for the sole purpose of registering his attendance, provided he is accompanied by a police officer at his own expense.