Court File and Parties

Court File No.: FC-23-00000013-0000 Date: 2024-12-30 Ontario Superior Court of Justice Family Court

Between: Kristen Geuze, Applicant

And: Rhyan Aaron Beal, Respondent

Before: The Honourable Justice J. R. Henderson

Counsel: J. Nabuurs, for the Applicant Rhyan Aaron Beal, Self-Represented, for the Respondent

Costs Decision

[1] By way of written submissions, the applicant, Kristen Geuze, requests her costs of this action that culminated with a three-day trial in October 2024. The respondent, Rhyan Beal, did not make or deliver any submissions on costs.

[2] The applicant was clearly the successful party. She obtained final orders regarding primary residence, decision-making responsibility, parenting time, and child support in accordance with the submissions made by her lawyer at trial. As the successful party, the applicant is presumptively entitled to a costs award pursuant to rule 24(1) of the Family Law Rules.

[3] Regarding the amount and scale of costs, I find that the applicant made reasonable attempts to settle this action. In particular, the applicant delivered a comprehensive written offer to settle in January 2024 and thereafter repeated the same offer in writing at subsequent conferences.

[4] The terms of the applicant’s offer are very close to the terms of the final order made by this court. Regarding the parenting issues, the primary difference between the final order and the applicant’s offer is that the offer proposed that the respondent’s parenting time would include every Wednesday evening, whereas the final order did not include Wednesday evenings, but included additional time on alternate Fridays.

[5] Regarding child support, the final order of this court was identical to the terms of the applicant’s offer regarding the amount of support and the respondent’s income. The only difference is that the applicant did not request payment of the arrears of support in the offer to settle, whereas the final order of the court included an order that the respondent pay the arrears that had accumulated since February 2022.

[6] The respondent did not make any formal offer to settle. Moreover, the respondent’s request for an order for 50/50 sharing of parenting time, even though he did not have an appropriate residence for the children, was not reasonable in the circumstances. His request for a significant reduction of child support was also not reasonable.

[7] In summary, I find that the applicant’s offer to settle dated January 2024 was a reasonable offer that the respondent should have accepted. If the respondent had accepted the applicant’s offer, this matter would not have proceeded to trial.

[8] For these reasons, I will make a costs award on a scale that is greater than partial indemnity costs and less than substantial indemnity costs.

[9] I have reviewed the applicant's bill of costs. I take no exception to the hourly rates, or the rates charged for appearances at court. I will make a modest reduction of the amounts set out in the bill of costs for administrative duplication.

[10] Accordingly, I hereby order that the respondent pay costs to the applicant in the amount of $15,000 plus HST, being a total of $16,950, payable within 90 days.

J. R. Henderson J. Date: December 30, 2024

Released: December 30, 2024