Court File and Parties

Court File No.: FC-16-761 Date: 2023/03/07 Ontario Superior Court of Justice

Between: Diane Brenda Ford, Applicant – and – Steven David Cassell, Respondent

Counsel: Manraj Grewal, for the Applicant Respondent, Self-Represented

Heard: February 22, 2023

Endorsement on Binding Judicial Dispute Resolution

MacEachern J.

[1] This matter proceeded by binding judicial dispute resolution heard on February 22nd, 2023.

Agreement to Conduct a Binding Judicial Dispute Resolution

[2] Both parties requested the Binding Judicial Dispute Resolution (“BJDR”) hearing to address parenting decision-making, parenting time, and child support since 2016. Both parties signed undertakings as part of this request and consented to the BJDR process. The Applicant mother signed her undertakings and consent on July 22nd, 2022. The Respondent father signed his undertakings and consent on July 25th, 2022. Justice Audet approved the BJDR hearing in her endorsement of July 22nd, 2022.

Respondent’s Request to Adjourn Denied

[3] On February 15, 2023, the Respondent requested an adjournment of the BJDR hearing. The Applicant opposed adjourning. On February 16, 2022, I directed that the parties attend on February 22nd, 2023, to speak to the adjournment request and to be ready to proceed if the adjournment was not granted.

[4] On February 22nd, 2023, after hearing submissions from both parties, I denied the Respondent’s request for an adjournment and gave oral reasons for doing so. Ultimately, I did not accept that the Respondent had not had a fair opportunity to prepare his material for the BJDR given that this proceeding was initially commenced in 2016, that the parties had agreed to the BJDR in July of 2022, the February 22, 2023 hearing date had been scheduled for many months, and that the Respondent had been served with the Applicant’s material on December 9th, 2022. Although the Respondent has several demands on his time, including his parents’ health and work commitments, I found that he has had ample time to prepare for this matter and retain a lawyer if that is what he wanted to do. I found that the Respondent’s request for an adjournment was aimed at delaying resolution, which would be prejudicial to the Applicant and the child’s best interests. This Application dates back to April 11th, 2016, when the parties’ child was almost two years of age. Their child is now 8 ½ years old. This Application has been long outstanding and needs a final resolution.

[5] In addition, although the Respondent did not file any affidavit evidence for today's hearing, his submissions did not support that any significant factual disputes between the parties prevented the determination of the child's best interests on the material before me.

Agreement on Some Issues

[6] During the BJDR hearing on February 22, 2023, the parties agreed on several parenting terms, as follows:

a) the Respondent’s regular parenting time shall be one weekend per month plus other parenting time as agreed by the parties based on the best interests of the child, such as, for example, if there is a special occasion or family gathering. b) the parenting schedule for Thanksgiving, Easter, and March break as set out in the Applicant’s proposed order. c) time-sharing during the summer school break as set out below. d) the child is free to contact the Respondent by phone or other electronic means, such as video conference, e-mail, or text, whenever he wishes.

Issues to be Decided

[7] The parties disagreed on decision-making, several aspects of the parenting schedule, and child support. I have decided these issues, and my final orders are below.

Application and Previous Court Orders

[8] This Application is under the Divorce Act R.S.C. 1985, c.3 (2nd Supp). The orders for parenting and child support are under the Divorce Act. A Divorce Order was granted within these proceedings on February 5th, 2019.

[9] On May 26, 2017, Justice Corthorn made a temporary order, on consent, for the child to be educated in French and for the Respondent to pay temporary child support of $345 per month, effective June 1st, 2017, based on the Respondent’s 2014 income of $35,000/year.

Parenting under the Divorce Act

[10] Under the Divorce Act, the sole consideration in making a parenting order is the child’s best interests. In determining the child's best interest, the court shall consider the factors related to the child's circumstances, including those set out under Section 16(3). Primary consideration must be given to the child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being.

Decision-making

[11] The Applicant seeks sole decision-making for the child. The Respondent seeks joint decision-making.

[12] It is in the child's best interest for the Applicant to have sole decision-making for the child. I have considered all of the circumstances of the child, including the factors set out under Section 16(3), including the following:

a) The status quo since the child's birth has been that the mother has made sole decisions for the child. Although in his submissions, the Respondent complains about the mother’s “lack of transparency” and her failure to seek his input, he is largely not critical of the mother’s decisions for the child. b) The Respondent’s main criticism of the mother’s decisions concerns extra-curricular activities for the child and being asked to contribute to the cost of such activities. Whether or not the father should be required to contribute to an activity expense under s.7 of the Child Support Guidelines is separate and separate from determining the main parenting issue surrounding decision-making. It will be dealt with under child support below. c) It is clear from the Applicant’s evidence and the submissions of the Respondent that the parties have poor communication. d) I reject the Respondent’s submissions that blame the Applicant for their communication issues. The evidence before me, and the Respondent’s submissions, support that the Respondent has not taken responsibility for information that the Applicant has provided or that is otherwise available to him by contacting third parties, such as, for example, the child’s school. e) The Respondent is a significant cause of the parties’ communication issues. This finding is supported by the Respondent’s preparation for the BJDR hearing. For example, the Respondent attended the BJDR hearing almost seven years after the commencement of this Application without a clear proposal for the resolution of the outstanding issues. f) There is no reasonable prospect that the parties will be able to make joint decisions together in a manner that is in the child's best interests. g) The child primarily resides with the Applicant mother and has primarily lived with the mother since birth. h) The Applicant has demonstrated her ability to make decisions in accordance with the child’s best interests. There is no reason to change this.

[13] The parties, and therefore the child, would benefit from a clearer understanding of decision-making. For this reason, it is also in the child's best interest for there to be an order that the parent who has care of the child shall be responsible for making day-to-day decisions for the child while the child is in their care.

[14] Related to decision-making is the right to contact third parties to obtain information related to the child's well-being. It is not contested between the parties that each party may contact third parties to obtain information about the child's welfare, such as the child’s school and medical professionals. Each parent should be proactive in doing so. For example, the Respondent must be responsible for informing himself from third parties, such as obtaining copies of the school calendar and the child’s progress reports and making arrangements for his parent-teacher interviews.

[15] Concerning information sharing between the parties, I agree that the parties should be exchanging some information between them that relates to the child's general well-being and that is in the child's best interest to share, such as information about important events in the child's life and his general well-being. But it is not in the child’s best interests to impose onerous obligations on the mother to report detailed information to the father when the father can, and should, obtain some information directly from others. Nor is it in the child’s best interests for the father to micro-manage and criticize the mother’s parenting from afar, or vice versa.

[16] I have therefore made the orders below regarding accessing information from third parties and sharing information between the parties. The mother has agreed to provide the father with the child's medical and other providers and any changes to these, which I have also ordered.

Parenting Schedule

Regular Schedule Transfer Time and Location

[17] The parties disagree on the transfer time for the father's regular weekend parenting. The mother lives in Ottawa. The father lives in Montreal. The mother proposes 6:00 PM. The father suggests 7:00 or 7:30 PM.

[18] Each party’s proposal for the transfer time relates to their proposal for the transfer location – the mother proposes a midpoint between Ottawa and Montreal at a truck stop in Hawkesbury. The father suggests that he pick up and drop off the child at a friend’s home in Ottawa.

[19] It is in the child’s best interests for the transfer time to be at 7:00 pm and for the transfer location to be at the truck stop in Hawkesbury as ordered below. The Hawkesbury stop is closer to the father than Ottawa. This transfer time should accommodate the father’s work schedule, as the father would otherwise have had to leave earlier to get to Ottawa for his proposed transfer time of 7:00 pm to 7:30 pm. Again, the Hawkesbury truck stop is closer to him.

[20] I know that the truck stop location proposed by the mother is not precisely halfway between the parties’ residences. I do not find that the site must be exactly equidistant between them. The site has facilities for the parties to use during transfer, which is the best proposal before me.

[21] The difficulty with the father's proposal is that there needs to be evidence before me that the third party the father proposes to facilitate the transfers has agreed to such an order, and there is none. I also do not have evidence that this person is known to the mother or the child such that the child would be comfortable at this person's home if the father were not there, which is what the father proposes [^1].

[22] Although the father submits that sometimes he may want to spend the weekend in Ottawa or travel to Toronto, this is not prohibited by the transfer location I have ordered. If the parties agree to arrangements for a transfer in Ottawa or some other site, they may do so. If they disagree, the transfers will occur at the truck stop. If so, the father can pick up the child at the transfer location on his way to Ottawa or Toronto.

[23] I have also considered, as a significant factor, the enormous benefit of having certainty for the transfer location and time, given the history of conflict these minor issues have caused, which is not in the child's best interests.

[24] The parties did not agree on whether the father’s weekend should be on the first weekend of the month (mother’s proposal) or around the 15th of each month (father’s proposal). There was no compelling evidence as to which was better. Both want certainty on how to determine which weekend applies. I have ordered below for the weekend to be the third full weekend of each month.

Telephone Contact

[25] The parties do not agree on terms for the father's telephone contact with the child. The father's position is that he should be allowed to call the child whenever he wishes. The mother proposes a specific time window on Sunday of each week.

[26] I reiterate that the parties agree that the child, who is now only 8 ½ years old, is free to contact the father whenever the child wishes and will be given access to technology to do so, subject to reasonable restrictions in accordance with the child's age. It is anticipated that as the child ages and matures, the child’s freedom to initiate communications with both parents will increase. To this extent, the immediate problem of telephone contact is time-limited.

[27] Telephone contact is a frequent source of conflict and tension between parents in separated households. Children often have many activities, interests, and routines on the go. Sometimes they are more or less interested in speaking to the other parent. Usually, their attention span and interest in doing so are time-limited and quickly change.

[28] Any proposal for telephone contact must be child-focused and attempt to minimize the potential for conflict if the calling parent does not get through and disruption if the calling parent calls too often or for too long.

[29] I am concerned that the Respondent father will not exercise restraint if allowed to call the child whenever he wishes. This would be contrary to the child's best interests and create significantly more conflict between the parties.

[30] Given the above concerns, at this time, it is in the child's best interest to have prescribed periods for the father to initiate communications with the child. The mother's proposal is based on Sunday evening being a good time for the child to engage in such conversations, so I have included this timing. I also stipulate that these calls be limited in length to not interfere with the child's activities and routine and to stay within the expiration of the child's interest in the phone call, such that they would generally be at most 15 minutes in length.

[31] I am also providing a second communication during the week. For certainty, unless another date and time are agreed upon between the parties and in writing, this will be Wednesday, between 7:00 and 7:30 PM, with the call ending after approximately 15 minutes.

Christmas

[32] The parties do not agree on how to share the Christmas school holiday period. They agree that, in general, the Christmas school holiday is usually two weeks. The mother proposes that the parties share this holiday equally. The father suggests that the child spend the entire holiday with one parent, alternating yearly.

[33] The mother’s proposal for the Christmas holidays makes more sense to me as being in the child's best interests than the father’s. It allows the child to spend one week with each parent over this holiday. The father's proposal is based on his view that it is simpler for the child to spend the entire Christmas school holiday with one parent. However, the father did not provide a specific reason for why it was simpler except that, in his mind, it is just simpler. The father also argues that the uncertain weather conditions around Christmas support the child being with one parent for the whole holiday. I do not accept this submission because the father also submitted that he would probably drive to Ottawa during the Christmas holiday in any event. The father’s main motivation behind his proposal is that he would like to be able to travel over the Christmas holidays for a period of longer than one week. However, he admits he does not have a history of doing so.

[34] The mother’s proposal for the Christmas holidays makes more sense to me as being in the child's best interests than the father’s. It allows the child to spend one week with each parent over this holiday.

[35] This does not prohibit either parent from asking for agreement from the other that the child spend the entire Christmas school holiday in their care if they had the occasion to, in doing so, provide the child with a fantastic opportunity to travel to a destination to which a shorter visit would not be reasonable. I have provided wording for such opportunities, to which the mother agrees, on the basis that such agreement is based on the child’s best interests and be reciprocated. But if the parties cannot agree, the Christmas school holiday will be equally divided as set out below.

Travel

[36] The mother withdrew her request for a contribution of $800 for travel expenses that she incurred to facilitate the father's parenting time.

[37] The mother seeks an order that she be permitted to travel internationally with the child without the father’s consent. Such an order is reasonable and in the child’s best interests. The evidence before me does not support that the mother would misuse such an order; it does support that the father will not be forthcoming with his consent to reasonable travel requests.

Child Support under the Divorce Act

[38] Under the Divorce Act, the court is required to make orders concerning child support in accordance with the applicable Child Support Guidelines.

[39] The mother seeks a final order for child support that incorporates the terms of the temporary order but increases child support as of 2018, based on the father’s income, which has increased. She also seeks contributions to Section 7 expenses.

[40] The child primarily resides with the mother. Under Section 3(1) of the Child Support Guidelines, the father must pay child support based on the applicable table amount for his income and the amount, if any, determined under Section 7 (special and extraordinary expenses).

[41] The father resides in Quebec; therefore, the tables used to determine the amount of child support are the Quebec tables.

[42] The mother provided evidence of the amount of child support that was payable by the father based on his actual income, as well as evidence relating to her claim for contribution to Section 7 expenses. She provided income information for the father that he had provided to her (notices of assessment), proof of her income through her notices of assessment, copies of receipts for Section 7 expenses, and child support calculation showing the after-tax cost of the Section 7 expenses and the parties’ proportionate sharing.

[43] The father did not provide any evidence concerning child support. He provided his income disclosure, which is the information the mother included in her affidavit.

[44] The father did not, in his submissions, make any alternate proposals for how to deal with child support. He sought additional time to investigate the mother’s claims for child support and to seek legal advice. For the same reasons that I denied his request to adjourn this hearing, I also rejected the father’s request to adjourn the determination of the child support issues. The father has had the Applicant’s affidavit material supporting her claim for child support since December 9th, 2022. This application includes a child support claim outstanding since 2016. The father has had ample time to address these issues.

[45] The mother’s calculations for child support are supported by the evidence. I have set out the father’s income in each of the years below, based on his income information attached to the mother’s affidavit, which he provided to her. I have specified the table amount that should have been paid each year for which the mother claims an increase in child support (which is only back to 2018).

[46] The father has been underpaying child support because he has continued to pay monthly child support based on the temporary order from 2017 at $345 per month, but his income has increased. I have adjusted child support accordingly.

[47] Child support is payable through the Director of the Family Responsibility Office (‘FRO’), which enforces the interim order for child support. I have therefore structured the order below to specify the increases to child support in each applicable year. I leave it to FRO to calculate the amount of the shortfall that is now due by the father as a result of these changes.

Section 7 Expenses

[48] The mother claims contribution to several Section 7 expenses – for child-care and activity expenses. The amounts claimed are supported by the evidence before me, including the after-tax net cost of such expenses.

[49] I find that the expenses claimed by the mother are proper Section 7 expenses, supported by the evidence, and order the father to contribute his proportionate share as set out below.

[50] I have ordered the father to contribute to the Section 7 activity expenses claimed by the mother. I accept the mother’s position that these expenses are Section 7 expenses because they are extraordinary activity expenses and reasonable and necessary for the child. These expenses include relatively modest expenses for karate, swimming, and hockey.

[51] I do not accept that the father does not have to contribute to these expenses because he was not consulted in advance. The Child Support Guidelines do not require that Section 7 expenses only be incurred after the other parent consents, although whether or not the other parent consents to the expense or was aware of the expense may be a factor in considering whether the expenses are reasonable and necessary.

[52] In this case, the child primarily lives with the mother and spends only one weekend a month with the father under the regular schedule. The expenses claimed by the mother are modest overall. The father agrees that the child enjoys sporting activities. These expenses are reasonable and necessary for the child and qualify under Section 7 as extraordinary activity expenses.

[53] On a go-forward basis, I agree with the Applicant mother that wording should be provided to minimize conflict over s.7 expenses. However, given the father’s history regarding child support, I do not find that it is reasonable to require the father’s consent as a precondition to the father being required to contribute to any Section 7 expenses. I have therefore made the order below.

[54] I strongly encourage the father to take immediate steps to inform himself of his obligations under the Child Support Guidelines. The father has had some confusion about his obligations to pay child support, leading to unnecessary conflict between the parties. This needs to change.

Disposition

[55] For the above reasons, I make the following Final Orders under the Divorce Act:

Parenting Decisions

1. The Applicant mother shall have sole decision-making authority for the child, X, born [redacted].
2. The parent who has care of the child shall be responsible for making day-to-day decisions for the child while the child is in their care.
3. Each party shall be entitled to retrieve information and disclosure regarding the child directly from school and medical professionals. Each parent shall be proactive in doing so. The Applicant shall provide the Respondent with contact information for the professionals involved in the child’s care and any changes thereto for this purpose.
4. The Respondent shall contact the child’s school access to arrange his access to the child’s progress reports and the school calendar.
5. The parties shall share information that relates to the child's general well-being, and that is in the child's best interest to share, such as information about important events in the child's life and general well-being. This information sharing is not intended to impose onerous obligations on either party or mitigate a party’s responsibility to take steps to inform themselves about information from third parties.
6. All communications between the parties shall be child-focused, brief, informative, and respectful.

Parenting Time

7. Child X shall primarily reside with the Applicant.
8. The Respondent shall have regular parenting time as follows: a) During the school year, unless otherwise agreed in writing, one weekend each month, from Friday evening until Sunday at 7:00 pm. This weekend shall be as follows: (i) On the third full weekend of each month. The parties shall count full weekends from the month’s first weekend that includes both Saturday and Sunday. For example, if the first day of the month falls on a Sunday, the following weekend is the month's first full weekend. (ii) The Respondent’s weekend shall be extended to include PD day or other holiday if it falls on a Friday, in which case the weekend will be extended to run from Thursday at 7:00 pm, or if the PD day or holiday falls on Monday, in which case the weekend will be extended to Monday at 7:00 pm. (iii) If both parties agree in writing, they may agree to a different weekend during the month for the Respondent’s parenting time. (iv) If both agree in writing, the parties may agree to additional parenting time, based on the best interests of the child, such as, for example, if there is a special occasion or family gathering. (v) Should one of these weekends fall within the holiday schedule (below), there will only be make-up time if agreed upon in writing or as otherwise provided below. b) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, in writing, transfers for the Respondent’s parenting time shall take place at exit 27 on 417 Highway in Hawkesbury, specifically at the Herbs gas drives. The parties shall meet there on Fridays at 7:00 pm and Sundays at 7:00 pm. c) The parties may decide upon other travel and parenting arrangements, including pick-up location; however, any changes must be agreed upon in writing.

Communication between Child and Parent

d) The child shall be free to contact either parent when in the other’s care, whenever he wishes, and will be given access to technology to do so, subject to reasonable restrictions given the child's age and stage of development. e) The Respondent father may also initiate communications with the child (by telephone, facetime, etc.) i. Two times per week, unless otherwise agreed in writing, on: (1) Sunday between 5 pm and 7:30 pm; and (2) Wednesday, between 7:00 and 7:30 PM ii. these calls shall be limited in length to not interfere with the child's activities and routine and to stay within the child's interest in the phone call, and shall end after no more than approximately 15 minutes.

Holiday Parenting Time

Christmas

9. The regular one-weekend-per-month parenting schedule shall be suspended during the Christmas school break.
10. The child shall spend one-half of the Christmas school holiday with each parent. The first part of Christmas is from Friday after school until 6 pm midway through the holiday, and the second part is from 6 pm midway through the holiday until Sunday at 6 pm before school.
11. In even-numbered years, the Applicant mother shall have the first week of Christmas Holidays, and the Respondent father shall have the second half of the holidays.
12. In odd-numbered years, the Respondent father shall have the first week of the Christmas Holidays, and the Applicant mother shall have the second half of the holidays.

March Break

13. The regular one-weekend-per-month parenting schedule shall be suspended during the March school break.
14. The child shall spend half of the March school break with each parent. The first part of March Break is from Friday after school until the midway of the March break, and the second part is from 6 pm of the midway of March Break until Sunday at 6 pm before school.
15. In even-numbered years, the Applicant mother shall have the first week of March Break, and the Respondent father shall have the second half of the March Break.
16. In odd-numbered years, the Respondent father shall have the first week of March Break, and the Applicant mother shall have the second half of the March Break.
17. If March Break becomes one week only, the parties shall keep the same schedule, sharing the one-week March school break equally with a transfer at 6 pm on the midpoint.

Easter and Thanksgiving

18. The regular one weekend-per-month parenting schedule shall continue to apply during the months of Easter and Thanksgiving, such that the Easter and Thanksgiving time is in addition to the Respondent’s one weekend per month regular time unless the regular weekend and the holiday weekend overlap, in which case there is no make-up time.
19. In odd-numbered years, child X shall remain with the Applicant mother for Easter weekend and shall be with the Respondent father for Thanksgiving weekend.
20. In even-numbered years, child X shall be with the Respondent father for Easter weekend and shall be with the Applicant mother for Thanksgiving weekend.

Summer Holiday

21. The child’s summer school break is from the end of June to mid-August. The parties shall share the summer school break approximately equally, with one parent having the child for the first three weeks of the summer break (from about July 1st) and the other parent having the child for the second three-week period, rotating each year between which parent has the first period and which has the second period.
22. During the summer school break, the Respondent's regular one-weekend-per-month parenting time schedule during the school year shall not apply.
23. The parties shall agree to the specific wording for this summer holiday sharing in a draft order provided to my attention. I will determine if they cannot agree to the language.

Travel

24. The Applicant mother may authorize travel for the child within Canada and internationally without requiring the Respondent’s consent. If doing so, the Applicant shall provide the Respondent with a detailed itinerary (specifying travel dates, destination, flights, and contact information) for the child no later than 14 days before the travel.

Child Support

25. Commencing June 1, 2017, and continuing on the first day of each subsequent month until changed by further court order, the Respondent shall pay the Applicant table child support for the child, X born [redacted] as follows: a) $345 per month based on the table amount for the Respondent’s income of $35,000 per year (Quebec tables); b) As of January 1st, 2019, the table child support shall increase to $394 per month, based on the table amount for the Respondent’s 2019 income of $41,745 per year (Quebec tables); c) As of January 1st, 2020, the table child support shall increase to $449 per month, based on the table amount for the Respondent’s 2020 income of $49,475 per year (Quebec tables); d) As of January 1st, 2021, the table child support shall change to $447 per month, based on the table amount for the Respondent’s 2021 income of $49,132 per year (Quebec tables).
26. Each year, commencing June 1st, 2023, the Respondent shall provide the Applicant with a copy of his complete income tax return for the previous year, as filed, including attachments and schedules, on or before June 1st, and a copy of all notices of assessment forthwith upon receipt. The table amount of child support payable by the Respondent to the Applicant shall then be adjusted to reflect the Respondent’s income in the prior tax year, with child support changing effective January 1st of the preceding year. If the parties cannot agree, either party may apply to the court to determine the proper adjustment.
27. For each year in which the Applicant seeks contribution to Section 7 expenses, she shall provide the Respondent, by June 1st, with a copy of her complete income tax return for the previous year, as filed, including attachments and schedules, and a copy of all notices of assessment forthwith upon receipt. The parties’ proportionate share of Section 7 expenses shall then be adjusted to reflect the party’s respective incomes in the previous tax year, effective January 1st of the prior year. If the parties cannot agree, either party may apply to the court to determine the proper adjustment.
28. In addition to the table amounts payable above, the Respondent shall pay the applicant $1,070 as his proportionate share of Section 7 expenses incurred by the Applicant for the period from 2018 to 2021, made up as follows: f) 2018 – Respondent’s share is $131; a) 2019 - Respondent’s share is $0; b) 2020 - Respondent’s share is $346; c) 2021 - Respondent’s share is $593.
29. For the years 2022 and forward, the Respondent shall pay his proportionate share of all special and extraordinary expenses incurred for the benefit of the child in accordance with Section 7 of the Child Support Guidelines. Based on the Respondent’s income is approximately $49,000 per year and the Applicant’s income is roughly $105,000 per year, the Respondent’s current share shall be 32% (to be adjusted once the parties’ share income information for 2022 and on a go-forward basis.) Section 7 expenses shall include: a) Dental, optometry, Speech-language pathology, and other medical-related expenses, after deducting any insurance reimbursements. b) Swimming, soccer and hockey-related expenses. c) Up to the Respondent’s maximum contribution to Section 7 expenses being $1,000 per year unless otherwise agreed by the parties or further court order.

Costs

[56] If the parties cannot agree on the costs of this motion, the Applicant may file cost submissions on or before March 17, 2023. The Respondent may file cost submissions on or before March 27, 2023. The Applicant may file a reply, if needed (proper reply only), on or before March 30, 2023. Cost submissions of both parties shall be no more than three pages in length (except for reply submissions, limited to 2 pages), plus any offers to settle and bills of costs and shall be spaced one point five spaces apart, with no less than 12-point font.

A copy of this decision with the child’s name and birthdate redacted will be sent to publication.

Released: March 07, 2023 MacEachern J.

Footnotes

[^1]: From the father’s submissions, it seems that the mother may have had some connection to this proposed third-party from approximately 20 years ago.