Sheila C. Mackinnon

The respondent mother moved for temporary spousal and child support and further disclosure.

The court found insufficient evidence to support the claims for interim spousal support and that the child support sought was less than what was already being paid.

The court also noted a significant factual dispute regarding the separation date and the respondent's income, including an unusual loan arrangement.

The motion for support was dismissed, and child support was ordered based on the court's income findings, which resulted in a lower amount than sought.

Costs were awarded to the applicant.

The trial concerned parenting arrangements for the parties' 12-year-old daughter and the mother's claim for spousal support.

The mother sought primary residence, sole decision-making, and discretionary parenting time for the father, along with orders dispensing with the father's consent for documentation and travel.

The father sought joint decision-making, specified parenting time, and reunification therapy, and dismissal of the spousal support claim.

The court found significant family violence perpetrated by the father against the mother and child, and that the child's views against contact were independent and justified.

The court granted the mother primary residence and sole decision-making, ordered the father's parenting time to be at the mother's discretion (considering the child's views), dispensed with the father's consent for documentation and travel, and ordered the father to pay spousal support.

The father's claims for joint decision-making and reunification therapy were dismissed.

The respondent brought a motion to change a 2007 child support order, seeking to terminate support for his 30-year-old intellectually disabled son and rescind all arrears.

The applicant opposed, seeking ongoing support and fixed arrears.

The court found the son was unable to withdraw from parental charge due to disability, entitling him to ongoing support under the amended Family Law Act.

The court determined the son's monthly needs, ordering the parents to contribute equally.

Arrears were significantly reduced due to Family Responsibility Office (FRO) inaccuracies and the applicant's delay in seeking Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) benefits, but not fully rescinded.