COURT FILE NO.: FS-20-69
DATE: 2020828
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Brandon Nicholas Machado Santos, Applicant
AND:
Monika Lidia Iskra, Respondent
BEFORE: The Honourable Justice Van Melle
COUNSEL: Steven M. Bookman, Maia Rabinovitch, for the Applicant
Komal Moondi, for the Respondent
HEARD: August 26, 2020 (Via Zoom Conference)
E N D O R S E M E N T
[1] This is an emergency motion brought by Brandon Santos, the father of A. for a reinstatement of his regular access schedule to his daughter A. born July 26, 2012. Mr. Santos and Ms. Iskra, A.’s mother, were in a relationship for three years. A. was 1-1/2 years old when the parties separated.
[2] The parties formalized a parenting agreement dated December 8, 2017. The father has been exercising access to A. without issue until recently.
[3] On April 18, 2020 the father was arrested as a result of a domestic incident between him and his current partner. The charges were subsequently dropped without condition. Despite that, the mother has kept A. from the father. She filed a cross motion in this matter to limit the father’s access by removing overnight access.
[4] This matter was case conferenced and the case conference judge ordered the involvement of the Office of the Children’s Lawyer, which involvement is pending.
[5] The mother submitted that overnight access be suspended pending input from the OCL. She proposed that the father have unsupervised access to A. in week 1 on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 5 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. and Saturdays from 12:45 to 7 p.m. and in week 2 Wednesdays and Fridays from 5 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. and Sundays from 12 p.m. to 7 p.m.
[6] There is no viable reason for permitting unsupervised daytime access but not permitting overnight access.
[7] Police involvement is always a serious matter. I accept that it would have been frightening for A. to have been present when her father was arrested. A. was left with her father’s partner and with her half-brother. There is nothing to indicate that she does not have a good relationship with the father’s partner and with her brother. Indeed, according to the father she has missed her brother and he has missed her. There is no evidence to indicate that the father would not be sensitive to A.’s feelings in regard to the April incident.
[8] Ms. Iskra says that she was not advised of the April incident and is concerned that were it to happen again, she would not find out about it. I take Mr. Santos at his word that this was an isolated event and that it will not be repeated. I caution both parties however, that failure to advise the other of important incidents is not to be condoned. On the other hand an attempt to take advantage of an event where it appears that nothing significant occurred is also not to be condoned.
[9] Although I am troubled by the father’s failure to take advantage of the supervised access offered to him, that is not a reason to suspend his overnight access.
[10] The father’s parenting time pursuant to the parties’ agreement is to be reinstated forthwith.
[11] At the conclusion of the hearing of the motion, I canvassed the issue of costs for the motion. Mr. Santos’ counsel says that her full indemnity costs are $7,900. I am not prepared to award full indemnity costs, but there will be an award of costs in favour of the father in the amount of $3,000.00 payable within 60 days.
Van Melle J.
DATE: August 28, 2020
COURT FILE NO.: FS-20-69
DATE: 20200828
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Brandon Nicholas Machado Santos, Applicant
AND
Monika Lidia Iskra, Respondent
BEFORE: The Honourable Justice Van Melle
COUNSEL: Steven M. Bookman, Maia Rabinovitch, for the Applicant
Komal Moondi, for the Respondent
ENDORSEMENT
Van Melle J.
DATE: August 28, 2020