Serge Ettinger

The applicant sought a further adjournment of his motion to terminate a support order, citing a need for legal advice.

The respondent opposed the adjournment, seeking to proceed and requesting the continuation of a previous order staying enforcement of support, and the payment of child support by the applicant.

The court granted a peremptory adjournment to the applicant, terminated the respondent's child support obligation to the applicant, and ordered the applicant to pay temporary child support to the respondent.

The respondent, Trevor Shaw, brought a motion for summary judgment under Rule 16 of the Family Law Rules for the sale of a jointly owned family home.

The applicant, Khim Kaing, opposed the sale, arguing it would cause significant hardship to her and their three young children.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that a forced sale would be oppressive due to the severe hardship it would impose on the applicant and the children, considering the children's best interests and the applicant's inability to secure suitable alternative accommodation while unemployed and attending school.

The defendant was charged with five offences under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act: one count of wilfully failing to inform the WSIB of a material change in circumstances within 10 days, and four counts of knowingly making false or misleading statements to the WSIB.

The charges arose from the defendant's failure to report various work activities and his responses on WSIB forms regarding his employment status and medical condition.

The court found that the WSIB failed to establish a clear communication strategy to ensure claimants understood what constituted a "material change" and that the defendant's understanding of "work" as paid employment was reasonable given the WSIB's own forms.

The court acquitted on all five counts, finding reasonable doubt as to the defendant's knowledge and intent.