V. Naik

The applicant father brought an urgent motion to oppose the respondent mother's relocation with their children from Ottawa to Kingston.

The respondent brought a cross-motion to remain in Kingston.

The court applied the framework for mobility rights and considered the best interests of the children.

Finding that the applicant had previously consented to the move via text message and that the respondent had established a new home and employment in Kingston, the court permitted the respondent to remain in Kingston on a temporary basis and ordered a specified access schedule for the applicant.

The Children's Aid Society of Ottawa brought a motion to set aside a legal ruling made by a motion judge who had dismissed its motion for summary judgment.

The underlying appeal had already been heard and dismissed, rendering the current motion moot.

The Divisional Court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the moot case, noting the lack of an adversarial context, judicial economy concerns, and the fact that the applicant was seeking a broad declaration rather than overturning an order.

The motion was dismissed.