ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT FILE NO.: 282/08 (St. Catharines)
DATE: 2012-08-10

BETWEEN:

Eric William Frayne Kemp Applicant – and – Sheena Heather Kemp Respondent

Ralph H. Frayne, for the Applicant
Luigi De Lisio, for the Respondent
Erik E. Grinbergs, for the Office of the Children’s Lawyer

HEARD: July 31 and August 1 & 2, 2012

The Honourable Mr. Justice J. W. Sloan

BRIEF TIME LINE HISTORY

[1] This is a mobility case. These cases are always difficult, not only for the parties and families involved but also for the Judge who must make the decision that the parties were unable to make.

[2] Eric is 27 and Sheena is 28.

[3] The parties moved into the basement apartment of the Sheena’s parent’s home together in late 2003, talked about having a child and Sheena became pregnant soon thereafter.

[4] The parties married on June 12, 2004, Hudson William Robb Kemp was born on August 31, 2004 and the parties separated on May 14, 2005.

[5] Sheena met her now fiancé David Magnotta in St. Catherines in 2008/9 and in April 2010 discussed with Eric her moving to Canada’s east coast where David was in school so she could be with him. She assumed Eric knew she meant she and Hudson would be moving but this was not Eric’s understanding.

[6] When Eric realized that Sheena intended to take Hudson with her and when the matter could not be resolved he commenced this action and obtained a consent order dated May 17, 2011, that Hudson could not be removed from Ontario until further court order.

[7] Sheena moved to Newfoundland in April, 2011 and to Victoria, BC in April, 2012.

[8] Both parties have new partners and both state they would like to have more children.

[9] Eric has been living with Stacy Gailbraith ,25, for about 14 months but there is currently no engagement or wedding planned.

[10] Sheena is engaged to David Magnotta, 30, and they are to be married in St. Catherines on October 6, 2012.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF ACCESS/CUSTODY

[11] Initially after the separation Sheena would not let Eric see Hudson when he was with his then girlfriend Alicia because of threatening calls Alicia had made to her and Eric refused to see Hudson without his girlfriend present.

[12] They both showed reasonable maturity in September of 2005 and after one mediation session supervised access started, which by November 2005 had Hudson staying with Eric & Alicia on alternate weekends.

[13] Except for Christmas access which the parties worked out between themselves neither Eric nor his family asked for additional access.

[14] In March of 2008 Sheena asked Eric to sign Ex. 5 dealing with the child tax credit and also offered Eric more mid week access being Tuesday and Thursday evenings.

[15] In approximately April of 2010 access was again changed to what it is now, being:

A. Tuesday from 3:30 pm to Wednesday at 7:30 am,
B. Thursday from 3:30 pm to Friday at 7:30 am,
C. Alternating Fridays from 3:30 pm to Saturday at 9:30 am,
D. Alternating weekends from Saturday at 9:30 am to Monday at 7:30 am and
E. Additional time during the March, summer and Christmas breaks.

[16] As set out in Paragraph 5, prior to April, 2011, there had been a missed communication between the parties, Sheena told Eric she was moving to join her fiancé and thought Eric had agreed she could take Hudson with her. Eric had no problem with her moving but was not aware of her intention to take Hudson. Having solidified her plans based on her interpretation of her discussion with Eric she left and this action ensued.

[17] Since April of 2011 the physical custody of Hudson has been split between Eric and Sheena’s parents as set out above. Sheena has kept in touch with Hudson daily by Skype for about one hour when he is at her parent’s home which is about 60% of the time.

[18] In addition Sheena comes to St. Catharines frequently and Hudson has travelled to be with her for the March breaks in 2011 & 2012, two weeks in the summer of 2011 and for 3 weeks last month. The last two visits have been in BC where Sheena and David reside.

FINDINGS

[19] Both parties and their significant others seem to be very reasonable people who have a good relationship with Hudson.

[20] There were some, but extremely few, allegations from each party about the other’s lunch making for Hudson, inappropriately dressing him in winter and not passing on school information in a timely manner. Each party denies the allegations made against them but even if they were true they were infrequent enough that they do not assist the court in determining what is in Hudson’s best interests.

[21] Hudson is a very lucky child when it comes to his extended family on both Eric and Sheena’s side.

[22] Although he is unlucky because he has some disabilities with his reading and spelling, his problem has been recognized by both Eric and Sheena who are both in the fortunate position of having family members in the teaching profession who are directing their efforts to assist Hudson to bring these skills up to an age appropriate level.

ERIC’S EXTENDED FAMILY/SUPPORT PEOPLE

[23] In addition to being assisted by Stacy, Eric has the support of his father Barrie Kemp and Barrie’s Spouse Catherine (Cathy) Langford. Although Eric’s mother Linda lives in the area she was not called as a witness and does not seem to have much contact with Hudson. Eric also has aunts, uncles and nephews in the area who appear to see Hudson mostly at family functions.

[24] Barrie Kemp is 59, lives in Niagara Falls and is retired from the agricultural wing of the Federal Government. He runs a small business of farming, dehydrating and selling fruit at markets in Toronto 2 days a week. He also spends some time at Hudson’s school bringing in such things as tadpoles and flowers to show to the children.

[25] Barrie sees Hudson every Thursday night when he picks him and a friend up for dinner and fishing. He also takes Hudson to the farm which Hudson enjoys.

[26] He describes Hudson as a very happy little boy who is very good & he never needs discipline when they are together.

[27] He testified that he would always be available for Hudson, no matter what. He states that Hudson’s reading has greatly improved over the last 6 months.

[28] The Kemp family have set up an RESP (currently in excess of $4,000) for Hudson and Hudson, in Barrie’s words “knows that he is going to university, it’s not an option”.

[29] Hudson also has aunts and uncles, some who take him to Toronto to do “big” city things like ride the subway and go the theatre. Very little evidence was lead about these types of events and Sheena could only recall one such trip when Hudson was taken to a children’s play.

[30] Barrie confirmed a male family canoe trip which includes Hudson to Algonquin Park in August of each year.

[31] Cathy Langford has resided with Barrie for approximately the last 7 years. She is a recently retired resource teacher who has been providing material and advice to Eric & Stacy for Hudson. She has been in touch with Hudson’s resource teacher and she is prepared to assist more in the future because she is now retired.

[32] Cathy stated Hudson was reading at about a mid grade 1 level. He will be entering grade 3 in September 2012.

[33] Stacy Gailbraith from her evidence is very supportive of Hudson. She seems to do the bulk of caring for Hudson including helping him dress, making his lunch and helping him with his home work. She also makes sure he washes and brushes his teeth. In Hudson’s school agenda book, the notes back to the teacher are written by Stacy not Eric. It also appears that Eric does not communicate with the teacher using the agenda. Stacey works for the Beer Store.

ERIC

[34] Eric does not appear to be academically inclined having a high school education and leaving college after 2 months. He, like Hudson suffers from some form of learning disability which he thought was dyslexia but no formal diagnosis was presented to the court.

[35] He has been employed in sales for an auto parts firm for the last 3 years and in 2011 earned $38,532. He generally works from 8 am to 5 pm and lives 20 km. from work.

[36] When Hudson is with him he leaves his home at 7:20 am to drop him off at preschool day care and returns to pick him up from day care at approximately 5:30 pm. School is over at 3:30 pm.

[37] Despite being employed on a full time basis and living rent free in a house owned by his father(except for some expenses which were never detailed) Eric had no assets except for an automobile on which he owes approximately $2,500.

[38] In the time between living with Sheena and Stacy, Eric had one other live in girlfriend.

[39] Memorial school, where Hudson goes to school is in the catchment area for Sheena’s parents’ home and not for where Eric lives so any children living near Eric will not go to Hudson’s school.

[40] Eric has a sister in Victoria BC who has a PhD and teaches at the University of Victoria.

SHEENA’S EX.TENDED FAMILY/SUPPORT PEOPLE

[41] Sheena has her parents Rosalie Armburst and Peter Robb who have resided in the same home for over 29 years, her fiancé David Magnotta, a sister in St Catherines and brother in Parry Sound as well as other extended family.

[42] Rosalie Armburst describes Sheena as very caring with Hudson and that she can make him feel comfortable in any situation.

[43] She testified that Hudson, without any prompting from her, said he wanted to live with his mother. She also said that Hudson enjoys his father.

[44] She, as well as her husband Peter, acknowledges that they will miss not having Hudson around as much as he has been if he goes to BC but Rosalie stated she knows he should be with his mommy who was his primary care taker from his birth until April 2011.

[45] She testified that Eric has only asked for extra time with Hudson once. She also feels Hudson will not have any problem adjusting to the move to BC.

[46] Like other family members Rosalie and Peter spent hours assisting Hudson with his reading and spelling.

[47] Peter also testified that with lots of cuddling from he and Rosalie Hudson adjusted quickly when Sheena left in April 2011.

[48] David, Sheena’s fiancé, is 30 and has an electromechanical engineering degree courtesy of the Canadian Navy so he must work for them under a 4 year contract until December, 2015. He earns $60,000/year.

[49] If he is ever away from his base in Victoria, BC Sheena will have access to the Military Family Resource Centre at her disposal.

[50] They plan to come back to St. Catharines every two months if possible.

[51] Both of Sheena’s parents are or were gainfully employed until retirement. It is in their home that Hudson has lived all of his life when not with his father.

SHEENA

[52] Sheena has a one year of college from Brock University.

[53] She has been gainfully employed in the financial services industry in an administration role since at least 2005. Recently she has been taking courses to become a Financial Adviser, a designation she hopes to obtain by the end of this year. She currently earns approximately $32,000 but hopes to at least double that amount within one year of becoming a Financial Adviser.

[54] Sheena and David live in a new subdivision in Victoria BC full of young families and children and near schools and parks etc.

[55] If Hudson lives with them they would not need day care since David when not at sea is off work at the same time as school is finished. Currently it appears David has not been to sea as his ship is being reconditioned and it will not be completed until at least January 2013. The evidence is unclear what time David may spend at sea however as a financial adviser Sheena would have great control over her hours of work.

[56] Sheena has been extensively involved is Hudson’s school work and assists him daily by computer and Skype when he is at her parents. In addition her parents do daily drills with Hudson when he is in their care. While living away from St. Catharines, Sheena continued to meet with Hudson’s home room and resource teachers when she visited St. Catharines and also kept in touch with them by electronic means.

[57] Everyone agrees Hudson is improving but still has a long distance to go.

[58] David has a great relationship with Hudson. Everyone seems to. Hudson seems to get along with and charm everyone he comes into contact with.

[59] Not surprisingly Sheena testified that Hudson wants to live with her. She believes that he will be very upset if he is not allowed to live with her. She described Hudson as an emotional wreck who cries when asking why he can’t live with her.

[60] She acknowledges that Hudson will have some adjustments at first but knows he will adjust very quickly. He has already made some friends in their neighbourhood from his two visits to Victoria. She describes him as being very positive.

[61] Sheena and Eric have each filed a plan of care (Sheena Ex. 6 and Eric Ex. 8) with respect to the access they would afford the other if they are awarded custody. Both plans are reasonable and quite similar.

[62] Sheena denies that she did or ever would advise Hudson that he could choose where he wanted to live and she suggested it may have been Eric who told him that.

[63] Sheena has also set up an RESP for Hudson currently in the amount of $1,269 and has life insurance of $100,000 payable to her mother in trust for Hudson.

[64] David is currently in year 2 of a 4 year contract with the Canadian Navy so they will be in Victoria for at least 2 more years and if he stays in the navy they will stay in Victoria.

ONTARIO CHILDREN’S LAWYER

[65] Mark Van Luven, a clinical investigator, was called on behalf of the OCL.

[66] His notes and recommendations were filed as Ex. 2 & 3, Ex. 3 being his notes from July of this year.

[67] The summary of his findings can be found at Ex. 2, Tab 2. His opinion is that Hudson should stay in the St. Catharines area mostly because of the family relations which reside there and have been a large part of his life. He also opines that staying in St. Catharines would be good for him because he would not have to change schools or day care. In addition he states that Hudson has already been “forced” to accept and manage the separation from his mother “so this change has already happened”.

[68] Hudson’s current school, Memorial is not in the catchment area for Eric’s residence and therefore Hudson may not be able to stay there. At one time Eric proposed to move Hudson’s school to Connaught school which is presumably in the correct catchment area but perhaps for purposes of this litigation he has retreated from that position.

[69] It is certainly true that Hudson is a very lucky little boy where family is concerned. He has a large very loving supportive family on both sides. No matter where Hudson lives this love and support will continue.

[70] Hudson will be well looked after physically no matter which parent or for that matter grandparent he lives with.

[71] Mr. Van Luven suggests that it will be easier to maximize Hudson’s time with each parent if Hudson stays in St Catharines because it is easier for adults to travel rather than children, who should abide by their school schedule. When one factors in the March, summer, & Christmas school breaks along with long weekends which can easily be extended by a couple of days, getting Hudson to Ontario will not be difficult and it is about a 5 hour flight. The court, if the parties cannot agree, can certainly order a certain minimum number of return visits per year.

[72] Currently Hudson, along with his reading difficulties, has low self esteem. Since he has told his teachers he is stupid, it is not difficult to ascertain that his two problems are linked.

[73] From Mr. Van Luven’s and other evidence it is apparent that Stacy is essentially the main care giver for Hudson both with respect to his schooling and at home.

[74] At page 70 of Ex. 2 tab 3, during a discussion between Hudson and Van Luven while discussing where he might live, Hudson spontaneously stated to Mr. Van Luven as he has set out in his notes that the “courts would decide who he lives with”, he “really doesn’t want to hurt dad’s feelings” and he “wants to be with mom”. Hudson goes on to state that he does not want his dad told what he said but that Van Luven can tell his mom.

[75] When asked why he wants to be with his mom Hudson, from a 7 year olds’ perspective, mentions mom has a bigger house, dog and things to do.

[76] Hudson acknowledges that if he lives with his mom his dad will be sad and that he will miss him.

[77] Van Luven states that it would be critical for Hudson to have contact with his mom from dad’s house if dad is awarded custody. To date no contact between Hudson and mom has taken place while Hudson is at Eric’s. In fact it was not until just before trial that Sheena learned that Eric had the means to communicate through Skype at his house for the past year. No explanation was ever offered by Eric as to why he would not tell Sheena he had Skype or why Hudson had never called his mom from his house.

CURRENT SITUATION

[78] Hudson has since birth lived in the home of Sheena’s parents. Sheena was present in the home until April of 2011 when she moved to be with her fiancé.

[79] Until April of 2008 Eric had some alternate weekend access which was increased to include 2 evenings in 2008 which were extended to 2 mid week overnights in 2010.

[80] No matter who the court awards custody to, Hudson’s home life is going to change to a large extent. He will no longer be living with his maternal grandparents where he lived approximately 90% of his life until 2010 and more than 60% of his life since. They have been a constant throughout his life.

[81] If Eric is awarded custody Hudson will live with Eric and Stacy. While they have lived together for 14 months there are no current plans to marry and Sheena worries about what will happen to Hudson if they separate. She points out that Eric had another live in girlfriend between her and Stacy that did not last.

[82] Given Eric and Stacy’s work schedule Hudson would spend about 17.5 hours per week of the school year in day care before and after school. [(7:30 am - 9:30 am & 3:30 pm - 5:30 pm) x 5days/week)] except for Thursday after school when Barrie picks him up. On this schedule Hudson would have to wake up at approximately 6 am each school day.

[83] He would likely continue at his present school which is not in the catchment area for Eric’s residence.

[84] He would be in the St. Catharines area close to his kin, especially Barrie Kemp and his maternal grandparents.

[85] If he moves with his mother’s to Victoria, BC he will of course have less physical contact with his grandparents, change schools and move away from whatever friends he has here.

[86] Hudson, because of technology, will still have face to face contact with family and friends through Skype which is free and audio contact by telephone which is inexpensive.

[87] In addition, since both Sheena and David and their families are from the St. Catharines area there will be frequent visits to this area.

[88] Sheena as a Financial Planner should be able to schedule her start time so no day care is needed for Hudson before school and David finishes work at 3:30 pm and will pick him up so there will be no need for after school day care.

[89] Hudson will be able to go to a school where the children in his neighbourhood go and will be able to play with them close to home, something which unfortunately seems not to be the case at present at either residence where he lives.

LEGISLATION & CASE LAW

[90] This is a mobility case. The law in this matter is governed by section 24 of the FLA and although there is no existing custody order the leading case is Gordon v Goertz , [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27.

[91] Paragraphs 49 & 50 of the Goertz case set out in summary form the law which the court must take into account when deciding “mobility’ cases. At paragraph 50 the Supreme Court states:

In the end, the importance of the child remaining with the parent to whose custody it has been accustomed in a new location must be weighed against the continuance of full contact with the child’s access parent, its extended family and its community. The ultimate question in every case: what is in the best interests of the child in all the circumstances, old as well as new? ” (underlining is mine)

[92] The focus must be on the best interest of the child, not the interests or rights of the parents.

[93] In Trisolino v Marzi , 2012 ONSC 3921 Penny J. states at paragraphs 37, 39 & 71:

(37) The court must engage in a “full and sensitive” inquiry into the best interests of the children. Among other things, that full and sensitive inquiry involves weighing the risks of relocation to the children against the benefits to those children of allowing the relocation to take place. Both parties’ plans for the children, therefore if relocation is permitted and if relocation is not permitted, must be analyzed and subject to “reality testing”.

(39) Mobility cases inevitably involve some degree of uncertainty about what may happen in the future following a relocation. Economic prospects may dissolve, relationships may fail and educational opportunities might disappoint.... This however is a necessary part of weighing the risks of relocation against the benefits.

(71) She quotes the late Professor McLeod when he wrote, “Families move all the time and children adjust.”

[94] In Bjornson v Creighton (2002), 31 R.F.L. 242 (Ont.C.A.) Austin J.A stated:

In this case, the child’s best interests are better served and better achieved by a well functioning and happy custodial parent, operating at her full potential.

[95] In Ryall v Ryall , 2009 ONCJ 687 at paragraph 96 Justice Carol Curtis states:

The father raises the age of the child and distance of the proposed move as to impediments to maintaining his relationship with Izabella. However courts have recognized in permitting a parent to move away with children, that modern-day technology has made it significantly easier to overcome the distance problem with respect to access and maximizing contact with the other parent.

[96] In Berry v Berry , 2011 ONCA 705 , the Ontario Court of Appeal at paragraph 27 stated:

...While the maximum contact principal is not absolute, it is mandatory. ....As the court decided in Woodhouse v. Woodhouse (1996), 29 O.R. (3 rd ) 417 (C.A.), while being with a happy parent has a positive effect on a child, the legal test focuses on maximizing contact with both parents and minimizing disruption to the child.

REASONS

[104] There is love and affection between Hudson and both of his parents however the emotional ties appear to be greater between Hudson and his mom notwithstanding that she has had to stay in touch with him by visits and daily Skype sessions. Sheena was by far Hudson’s primary care giver until March 2011 and while not always physically present in St. Catharines she has maintained an amazing constant presence in his life and in contact with his school and assisted him with his reading through computer programs over Skype since march 2011.

[105] Sheena’s parents, who have been consistent care givers since his birth, are supporting Sheena in her quest for custody. It is their evidence that Hudson misses his mom terribly and needs her cuddling and emotion support. While it can certainly be argued that they are simply supporting their daughter, it must be remembered that they are also Hudson’s grandparents and have spent much more time with him than either parent. They have intimate knowledge about Hudson’s emotional makeup and would only want what is best for Hudson and therefore their evidence must be given some weight.

[106] Hudson has also stated a preference to live with his mother and while both Eric’s lawyer and the OCL submit that I should disregard it, I find that it must be afforded some weight notwithstanding that the reasons he gave for stating his preference referred to material things. Hudson has clearly stated to a third party he wishes to live with his mom and does not want to hurt his dad.

[107] At Eric’s, the bulk of the parenting will fall to Stacy including interactions with the school and most likely helping with Hudson’s school work. Eric has literacy issues of his own and I get the impression that he is embarrassed by this and somewhat lacking in self confidence because of it, especially when it comes to dealing with Hudson’s teachers. I acknowledge that Eric has been getting assistance with how to assist Hudson with his school difficulties from Cathy and this of course can only be positive.

[108] Sheena has demonstrated that even distance will not impede her tenacity and ability to assist her son with his literacy problems. There is no doubt that she would be even more effective in person.

[109] Eric’s plan for custody that has been presented to the court is more of the same but without sharing the responsibilities with Sheena’s parents. This means there will be approximately 17.5 hours of day care per week during school months which means Hudson will be at school/daycare for 10 hours each school day. He will probably remain at Memorial where none of the children who attend Memorial will live in his neighbourhood. His home room teacher will change as he enters grade 3.

[110] By contrast at Sheena’s there will be no daycare, Hudson would reside in a neighbourhood full of young families with children his age. He would go to a school in his catchment area so that his classmates will live near him. His new home is close to parks. He will enjoy a sense of community that seems to have been absent to date in his somewhat “adult” world.

[111] Eric’s relationship with Stacy started in about May 2011 and is 14 months old but they are not engaged nor are there any plans to get married. He had one other live in relationship between Sheena and Stacy.

[112] Sheena met David in 2009 is engaged and they are to be married in October of this year. They have been in a committed relationship for approximately 36 months. While no one has a crystal ball it seems Sheena is currently in a more stable relationship than Eric. They are also in a better financial position to assist Hudson.

[113] Although Eric had Skype for about one year prior to July 2012 he did not tell Sheena nor has he encouraged/allowed Hudson to call his mom when Hudson is at his home. This shows a lack of insight by Eric that Hudson needs frequent contact with his mom. I have far more confidence that Sheena will encourage Hudson to call and Skype with his dad when he is in BC than I have that Eric would encourage Hudson to call and Skype with his mom if he were to remain in St. Catharines. The use of Skype is free and long distance plans in Canada are inexpensive.

[114] Eric has never looked after Hudson full time and when Hudson is with him he depends heavily on other people for assistance especially Stacy. If Sheena lived in St. Catharines custody would definitely be awarded to her.

[115] The next 2 -3 years for Hudson appear to be critical. His language skills and self confidence must improve or he will probably fall too far behind academically to catch up and Barrie’s dream (and I assume everyone else’s dream) of Hudson going on to university will fall by the wayside. Sheena is the best person to be in charge of Hudson’s learning at this critical time. Cathy of course can, as she has done in the past, offer her suggestions and support for Hudson even though he is in BC.

[116] Hudson will have the opportunity to foster his relationship his aunt, Eric’s sister, who is a professor at the University of Victoria.

[117] Sheena will, as she has demonstrated in the past, go out of her way to maximize contact between Hudson and his father. I have no doubt she will do the same for Barrie.

[118] After weighing all of the evidence I find that it would be in the best interests of Hudson to live with his mother in Victoria.

ORDER

[119] There shall therefore be an order that Sheena H. Kemp shall have custody of Hudson William Ropp Kemp born August 31, 2004.

[120] Sheena shall consult with Eric regarding all important decision with respect Hudson before making her final decision. She shall keep Eric apprised of all of Hudson’s educational, medical and extracurricular activities.

[121] Eric William Frayne Kemp shall pay child support for Hudson William Ropp Kemp born August 31, 2004 in the amount of $342 per month commencing September 1, 2012 and on the first month thereafter based on his 2011 income of $38,533/annum.

[122] Eric William Frayne Kemp shall pay his proportionate share of the child’s agreed upon Section 7 expenses. Currently Eric would pay 55% based on his income of $38,533 and Sheena would pay 45% based on her income of $31,128. Eric shall not unreasonably withhold his consent. Initial counselling for Hudson to assist him to adjust to the move shall be considered a Section 7 expense.

[123] There shall be the usual clause that each party shall exchange their tax returns by May 15 of each year and notices of assessment forthwith after they are received. Child Support shall be adjusted on June 1 of each year.

[124] The parties shall maintain Hudson as a beneficiary of any extended medical plans they are enrolled in and they shall forward to each other copies of any extended medical plans they have available for Hudson so full advantage of the plans can taken.

[125] Sheena may apply for a passport of Hudson at her expense. She will retain the passport in her possession but make it available to Eric for travel outside of Canada and Eric shall return the passport to Sheena forthwith after his trip.

[126] Both parties will sign, if requested, a letter authorizing the other to travel with Hudson outside of Canada.

ACCESS - LIFE INSURANCE

[127] I do not propose to deal with access or Life Insurance until the parties have had a chance to resolve these issues themselves. Upon resolution I will add them to my order so each party has only one order to deal with. If the parties are unable to resolve these issues they can send brief submissions to me at Kitchener.Superior.Court@ontario.ca .

[128] In an effort to assist the parties with respect to resolving the issue of access, Hudson should be returned to St. Catharines at least 4 times per year at Sheena’s expense for extended periods during the March, summer and Christmas school breaks and for a shorter time period in the fall for the farm harvest. Hopefully Hudson’s maternal grandparents would also be able to see him during these visits. In addition Sheena could also consider paying for Eric to visit Hudson in BC on an annual basis at her expense of which could be set at $1,500 which should cover his flight and accommodation.

[129] Access should also be made available to Barry and other family members if they visit BC.

[130] Of course electronic access should be generous, both to Eric and Barry.

[131] If an impasse is reached Mr. Frayne shall forward his brief submissions on costs to me within 10 days of the impasse. Mr. De Lisio shall forward his response to me within 5 days with Mr. Frayne’s to forward his reply, if any, within 5 days after receiving Mr. De Lisio’s response.

J. W. Sloan J.

Released: August 10, 2012

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: Eric William Frayne Kemp Applicant -and- Sheena Heather Kemp Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT J. W. Sloan J.

Released: August 10, 2012