SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
COURT FILE NO.: FS-13-388822
DATE: 20140909
RE: IRYNA HARBARETS, Applicant
AND:
ANDRIJ KISIL, Respondent
BEFORE: STEWART J.
COUNSEL:
Galyna Pribytkova, for the Applicant
Bohdan A. Shulakewych, for the Respondent
HEARD: July 17, 2014
ENDORSEMENT
[1] The parties have resolved the issues of disclosure raised on this motion. The only issue remaining is the Applicant’s request for an order pursuant to Rule 24(12) of the Family Law Rules requiring the Respondent to pay her anticipated costs of questioning and of proceeding with her Application for spousal support and property equalization.
[2] The application of Rule 24(12) is to be carried out with a view of ensuring a fair procedure. Similarly, the discretion exercised under Rule 24(12) must be applied to further this primary objective of fairness (see Stuart v. Stuart, 2001 28261 (ON SC), [2001] O.J. No. 5172 (S.C.J.)).
[3] In my opinion, at this stage of the proceedings the Applicant has not demonstrated that she qualifies for the order she seeks.
[4] In particular, I agree with the position of the Respondent that there are several facts operating to undermine the Applicant’s assertion that she needs this relief in order to level the playing field. The Applicant is currently living with the father of her child, and is benefiting from his contribution to the household expenses. She is in receipt of monthly spousal support from the Respondent. She recently embarked upon an extensive vacation. She has chosen to return to school rather than seek full-time employment.
[5] Further, counsel for the Applicant has not provided anything more precise or reliable than a rough estimate of the advance costs sought. In particular, no bill of costs or summary of anticipated steps and expense thereof has been provided.
[6] For these reasons, I decline to make an order for interim costs at this time. This order is without prejudice to the right of the Applicant to bring a further motion for relief should her circumstances so warrant and on more comprehensive material, if so advised.
[7] If the parties cannot agree on costs, brief written submissions on that subject may be delivered to me for consideration within 20 days of the date of release of this decision
STEWART J.
Date: September 9, 2014