The court considered whether the applicant's motion for urgent parenting relief should be heard before a case conference, as required by the Family Law Rules.
The applicant sought immediate primary care of the child, exclusive possession of the matrimonial home, and a police enforcement clause.
The court reviewed the parties' positions, the applicable legal tests for urgency, and the conduct of counsel.
The court found that the test for urgency was not met, dismissed the urgent motion, and awarded costs against the applicant.
