Court File and Parties
Newmarket Court File No.: FC-20-561-00 Date: 20200522 Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
Re: Kevin Collins, Applicant And: Jennifer Collins, Respondent
Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice D.A. Jarvis
Counsel: Daniel A. Sandler, Counsel for the Applicant Julie A. Layne, Counsel for the Respondent
Heard: In Writing
Case Conference and Motion Endorsement
[1] Pursuant to the Order of Sutherland J. dated May 8, 2020, a case conference was held on May 15, 2020. The issue conferenced involved the parenting arrangements for the parties’ two year old daughter currently in the de facto custody of her mother.
[2] The parties were married on September 15, 2012 and separated on April 5, 2020. There is no agreement or court Order in place with respect to parenting.
[3] Recommendations were given during the conference. The parties agreed to discuss those with their lawyers to ascertain whether a temporary, without prejudice Order could be made. Counsel have now advised that the parties were unable to reach a consensus.
[4] While Sutherland J. determined that the father’s motion for leave was urgent and that a case conference should be held, he left to the conference judge the decision whether a motion was needed. Since then the Chief Justice has expanded the range of permissible matters that may be brought to include “pressing” rather than “strictly urgent” matters. In my view, the issue of a temporary parenting arrangement during the current pandemic is a pressing matter and the father may proceed with his motion.
[5] The following is directed: (a) The father may proceed with his motion the only issue for which (apart from costs) will be the temporary parenting arrangements for the child; (b) The father shall serve his Motion material by Tuesday, May 26, 2020 (4:00 p.m.); (c) The mother shall serve her responding material by Friday, May 29, 2020 (4:00 p.m.); (d) Reply (if any) by the father to be delivered by Tuesday, June 2, 2020 (4:00 p.m.); (e) The affidavits of the parties referenced in (b) and (c) above shall be limited to four pages and the reply limited to two pages, all exclusive of exhibits. The father may also rely upon, and refer to, his affidavit sworn on April 29, 2020: the mother may do likewise with respect to her affidavit sworn on May 5, 2020; (f) All affidavits shall be single page, double-spaced; (g) Each party shall file as part of their material their proposed temporary parenting proposal. This shall not form part the affidavit page limitation in (e) above; (h) All material shall be served and filed electronically; (i) No other material may be filed by either party; (j) Delivery of Form 14C confirmations is dispensed with; (k) The court administration shall schedule the motion to proceed no earlier than June 4, 2020 and, subject to the direction of the motion judge, it shall be limited to thirty minutes. The prior affidavits of the parties referenced in (e) above shall be forwarded by court administration to the motion judge; (l) Each party shall have ten minutes to make their submissions: the father shall be entitled to a five-minute reply; (m) The parties shall discuss the amount that they will be claiming for costs before the motion is argued and be in a position to advise the court of that amount if asked by the motion judge following argument; (n) The parties are encouraged to exchange Offers to Settle but those must not be filed with the court or referenced until argument has concluded and directions are given by the judge.
[6] The limitation on argument time is because the motion judge will have had ample opportunity to review the parties’ evidence and their proposed parenting proposals before argument is heard.
[7] In the circumstances of the COVID-19 emergency, this endorsement is deemed to be an Order of the Court that is operative and enforceable without any need for a signed or entered, formal, typed Order. Approval of this Order is dispensed with: either party may submit a formal Order for signing and entry once the court re-opens.
Justice David A. Jarvis Date: May 22, 2020

