S. O’Connell

The biological mother brought a motion to be added as a party to an ongoing motion to change parenting arrangements between the maternal grandparents and the biological father.

The mother, who had previously withdrawn from the proceedings, sought to be added to request specified parenting time.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that adding her at this late stage would cause significant delay, require an adjournment of the imminent trial, and expose the child to increased conflict.

The court noted the mother could still testify as a witness and bring her own motion to change in the future.

The parties reached a final consent on all substantive issues regarding a parenting plan for their five-year-old son, leaving only costs to be determined.

The applicant father had originally sought an equal time-sharing arrangement and reduced child support but abandoned these claims at the final settlement conference after firing his lawyer.

Both parties sought costs.

The court found the father's 'all or nothing' approach unreasonable and not child-focused, noting he could have achieved his goals gradually.

The respondent mother was entirely successful and was awarded costs of $6,000.

The applicant mother was entirely successful on her motion for summary judgment for child support.

She sought costs on a full recovery basis.

The respondent father, who was self-represented, argued no costs should be awarded because the mother was supported by Legal Aid and he was a victim of 'DNA theft'.

The court rejected the father's arguments, noting that legally aided parties are entitled to costs.

However, the court declined to award full recovery costs because the mother failed to serve an offer to settle.

Costs were fixed at $4,000.