Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: 624/17 DATE: 2020-05-04 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Milad Haghani, Applicant AND: Ashley Petrovsky Haghani, Respondent

BEFORE: The Honourable Mr. Justice A. Pazaratz

COUNSEL: Self-Represented Applicant Ms. T. Hammond-Grant, Counsel, for the Respondent

HEARD: In Chambers – Triage Endorsement

Endorsement

[1] AS A RESULT OF COVID-19, the regular operations of the Superior Court of Justice are suspended at this time, as set out in the Notice to the Profession dated March 15, 2020 available at https://www.ontariocourts.ca/scj/covid-19-suspension-fam/.

[2] For the moment, the court is prioritizing “urgent” matters. A supplemental Notice to the Profession dated April 2, 2020 sets out a narrow list of less urgent matters the court will attempt to deal with, as time and resources permit. (Further information is available in the April 7, 2020 “Protocol Regarding Family and Child Protection Matters in Central South Region”.)

[3] This motion was referred to me as Triage Judge for a preliminary determination of urgency and of how this matter should proceed. Determinations of urgency are summary in nature, and wholly without prejudice to both parties on the hearing of the motion itself.

[4] Electronic materials were filed through the Courthouse email address: Hamilton.Family.Superior.Court@ontario.ca. Upon the resumption of court operations all materials will be duly filed in the physical record at the courthouse.

[5] I have received and reviewed the following materials:

a. Letter from Applicant father to the Superior Court Trial Coordinator dated May 1, 2020. b. Applicant’s Notice of Motion dated May 1, 2020. c. Applicant’s draft temporary order. d. Applicant’s affidavit dated May 1, 2020. e. Applicant’s factum dated May 1, 2020. f. Applicant’s undated/unsworn Affidavit of Service setting out that the Respondent’s counsel of record Toni Hammond-Grant was served by e-mail on May 1, 2020 at 4:30 p.m.

[6] The subject matter is two children ages seven and three.

[7] Even based on the father’s materials, it is clear that there has been a long-standing acrimonious dispute in relation to the children. And by the father’s admission, there have been serious concerns about his lifestyle which have led to historic restrictions in relation to his contact with the children.

[8] The mother has not had an opportunity to respond to these materials. Clearly, she should be allowed an opportunity to provide an equally detailed response.

[9] As Triage judge it is not my role to determine the merits of a case or even to speculate as to the likely or appropriate disposition. My role is to determine whether the issues raised are potentially urgent, as defined in the court’s COVID-19 protocols.

[10] The bottom line is that the father is alleging that despite historic concerns about his drug use (for example), initial restrictions on his access have long-since been relaxed. He says that for an extended period he was having regular alternate weekend access to the children, and that in March 2020 the mother suspended this access citing COVID-19 concerns. He has brought an urgent motion to reinstate access. He is also seeking make-up time.

[11] As stated, the mother needs to have an opportunity to respond to the father’s narrative. But in any case where one parent is alleging that a long-standing pattern of time-sharing has been suddenly and unilaterally interrupted, the court must afford an opportunity for parenting arrangements to be addressed as quickly as possible – for the sake of the children involved.

[12] In the circumstances, I find that the issues raised in the materials before me are potentially urgent. This is a preliminary determination, without prejudice to either party on the ultimate hearing of the motion.

[13] The mother shall be permitted until May 11, 2020 at 11:00 a.m. to serve and file any responding motion documents.

a. Her affidavit should be no longer than the father’s affidavit. b. The mother’s responding materials (excluding any factum) should total no more than 10 pages.

[14] The father may serve and file a reply affidavit (not more than two pages in length) by May 13, 2020 at 11:00 a.m.

[15] With respect to factums:

a. The father has served a factum. Given the complexity of this file, the mother should also serve and file a factum. b. However, the father’s factum was prepared without the benefit of receiving the mother’s materials. He may elect to rely on his factum, or he may serve and file an updated factum also by May 13, 2020 at 11:00 a.m. c. The mother shall serve and file her factum by May 15, 2020 11:00 a.m.

[16] Each party shall serve and file documents by e-mail.

[17] The matter will be scheduled to be dealt with by a Judge on or after May 18, 2020.

a. The Judge may decide to conduct a hearing by teleconference. In that event, the parties will be advised by the court as to the date and time of the teleconference. b. However, after reviewing the file, the Judge may determine that it is more appropriate to deal with the matter based solely on the written materials, without a teleconference. In that event, the parties will be forwarded a copy of the Judge’s written decision. c. The judge dealing with the matter will make a formal determination as to whether the materials filed – and any responding materials – raise any issues which meet the threshold of being “urgent”, as required in the Notice to the Profession. If urgency has been established, the Judge will make any necessary orders.

[18] The father has previously been represented by counsel, although it would appear he is currently representing himself. As it happens, he is also a lawyer. However, as with any self-represented party, he should obtain legal advice as quickly as possible, and in any event before any hearing by teleconference. The Court has been advised that legal information may be available to individuals who qualify, through the Law Society of Ontario at the following phone numbers: Toll-free: 1-800-268-7568; General: 416-947-3310. If the parties qualify, they may also wish to contact the Client Service Centre of Legal Aid Ontario at 1-800-668-8258.

[19] Notwithstanding rule 25 of the Family Law Rules, this endorsement is effective from the date it was made and enforceable as an order of the court without the need for an order to be prepared or approved by the parties and then issued by the court. No formal order is necessary unless an appeal or a motion for leave is brought, or alternatively unless one is necessary for enforcement by a third party. A party who wishes to prepare a formal order for approval and issuance may do so, and submit materials by Form 14B to the court.

Pazaratz J. Date: May 4, 2020