Veronica-Ann Mallari

On a summary judgment motion arising from a Hague Convention proceeding, the court held that commencing a Hague application for return of children does not amount to attornment to Ontario jurisdiction for distinct divorce and corollary relief claims added by the responding party.

The court recognized a Costa Rica divorce judgment under the common law framework preserved by s. 22(3) of the Divorce Act and rejected an argument that recognition should be denied for unfair forum shopping.

Although Ontario retained jurisdiction simpliciter over equalization and property issues because Ontario assets remained and the foreign court had not finally quantified equalization, the court declined to exercise that jurisdiction under forum non conveniens.

The equalization and property issues were left to be completed in Costa Rica, without prejudice to a later Ontario proceeding limited to disposition of the matrimonial home and distribution of net sale proceeds.

The applicant father brought an interim motion to change a final order concerning child support, decision-making responsibility, and parenting time.

He sought a reduction in child support, alleging parental alienation, and proposed a police apprehension order for parenting time enforcement.

The court dismissed the motion, finding no material change in circumstances to justify varying the final order on an interim basis.

The court emphasized that the applicant's dissatisfaction with child support was not a material change, and his proposals for "retribution" via child support reduction and police enforcement were contrary to the children's best interests and an abuse of process.

The applicant mother sought the return of her two children to Costa Rica under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, arguing they were habitually resident there and wrongfully retained in Canada by the respondent father.

The father contended the move to Costa Rica was temporary and the children's habitual residence remained Ontario.

The court applied the hybrid approach to determining habitual residence, considering parental intention and the children's acclimatization, and found that the children's focal point of life was Costa Rica as of August 11, 2023.

The application was granted, and the children were ordered to be returned to Costa Rica, as no exceptions to return applied.

The applicant father brought a motion to change a 2015 final order that required him to pay child support based on an imputed income of $50,000.

He sought to set aside the order under Rule 25(19) of the Family Law Rules and argued a material change in circumstances due to his health and financial situation.

The court dismissed the motion, finding no evidence of fraud, mistake, or a material change in circumstances.

The court fixed the arrears for base child support and section 7 expenses, ordered monthly payments towards the arrears, and awarded partial indemnity costs to the respondent mother.