Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: FS-12-2897 DATE: 2024 07 03

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Denise D’Mello, Applicant v. Roy Ramsunahi, Respondent And Family Responsibility Office, Respondent

BEFORE: D. E. Harris J.

COUNSEL: Unrepresented Applicant Unrepresented Respondent M. Mansoor, for the Respondent Family Responsibility Office

Endorsement

[1] The respondent Mr. Ramsunahi requests that his responsibility to pay support be suspended for the summer months and that enforcement action against him for that time period be suspended. I dismissed the application at the hearing and write these reasons to briefly explain the decision.

[2] Counsel for the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) Ms. Mansoor, thoroughly reviewed the history of the respondent’s lack of support compliance over the years amidst other issues. Suffice it to say, the respondent’s history is poor. He is in arrears close to $100,000.

[3] Justice Mandhane presided over a trial in January of this year. Her reasons are at D’Mello v. Ramsunahi, 2024 ONSC 474. She found that the respondent was not a credible witness and attempted to mislead the court. He was argumentative in his testimony: see paras.14-15. The costs reasons at 2024 ONSC 801 contain additional negative comments with respect to the conduct of the respondent.

[4] There has been no material change nor an application with respect to a material change. The respondent claims that he needs his driver’s licence for work and to pick up and drop off the children of the marriage. Unfortunately, with his less than stellar history and his questionable credibility, the relief requested cannot be granted.

[5] The respondent also requested a full itinerary from the applicant when taking the children out of the country, true copies of the childrens’ passports and copies of current health cards. In the circumstances, I am not going to order the applicant to provide these documents. The matter is best left to her discretion. It may be better for both parties for these items to be provided but it is best to leave this in the mother’s judgment.

[6] The application is dismissed.

D.E. Harris J. Released: July 3, 2024