Court File and Parties
Court File No.: FS-20-20794 Date: 20220225 Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Between: Kyle Sanvictores, Applicant – and – Nancy Sanvictores, Respondent
Counsel: L. Daichtman and B. Vinasithamby, for the Applicant Self-represented, for the Respondent
Heard: February 10, 2022
Pinto J.
Supplementary Reasons for Decision
[1] On February 11, 2022, I released my Reasons for Decision (“Reasons”) dismissing the respondent wife’s motion.
[2] At the hearing of the motion on February 10, counsel of the applicant requested that I strike out certain paragraphs of the respondent’s affidavit dated February 2, 2022 as they relate to developments at a Case Conference. I agreed to do so, but neglected to include this in my Reasons.
[3] On February 15, 2022, counsel for the applicant wrote to the court reminding me of this issue. The respondent wrote back indicating that she is not in agreement with any modifications to my Reasons as if this were the case, she would try and modify all errors in the past few endorsement to date.
[4] Under Rule 17(23) of the Family Law Rules, which deal with “Confidentiality of Settlement Conference”, no brief or evidence prepared for a settlement conference and no statement made at a settlement conference shall be disclosed to any other judge, except in an agreement reached at a settlement conference, or an order.
[5] While there is no specific rule that speaks about the confidentiality of Case Conferences, case law has affirmed that the same limitations should apply at Case Conferences: Bordynuik v. Bordynuik, at para. 8; and Rouillard v Rouillard, 2015 ONSC 3627, at para. 13.
[6] Paragraph 10 of the affidavit of the respondent dated February 2, 2022 clearly makes reference to the developments at a Case Conference on February 5, 2021 before Justice Kraft. That paragraph should be struck out in its entirety from the affidavit.
[7] Part of paragraph 11 of the same affidavit should be struck so that the revised paragraph should state:
If you look at the Endorsement of Her Honour Justice Kraft dated February 5, 2021, number 9, it is understood that Kyle was to switch empty phones with C.S. our daughter. Kyle gave her his phone and purchased a new one after separation. Due to the “low memory” capability of that particular phone, it was completely wiped. In June 2021, Kyle met with my mother to make the switch of the old phones but brought the wrong phone on purpose and refused to make the switch. He wanted to “set me up” to be in “breach of Court Order”.
[8] Paragraph 23 and Exhibit A to the same affidavit should be struck out in their entirety as they make reference to developments at the February 5, 2021 Case Conference or notes taken by the respondent’s former counsel at the Case Conference.
[9] The parties shall provide me with an order consistent with this endorsement.
Pinto J. Released: February 25, 2022
Original Reasons for Judgment Header
Court File No.: FS-20-20794 Date: 20220211 Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Between: Kyle Sanvictores, Applicant – and – Nancy Sanvictores, Respondent
Reasons for Judgment
Pinto J. Released: February 11, 2022