3 total
The court dismissed the mother's family law application, finding that the Shanghai People's Court was the more appropriate forum.
The Respondent Father brought a motion to dismiss the Applicant Mother's application for parenting, property division, and support, arguing that Ontario lacked jurisdiction and that the Shanghai People's Court was the more appropriate forum.
The parties were divorced in China, and a Final Agreement covering these issues was issued by the Shanghai People's Court.
The court granted the Father's motion, dismissing the Mother's application, finding that the parties had attorned to the Shanghai jurisdiction and that an order already covered the outstanding issues.
The court determined that Ontario did not have jurisdiction for corollary relief under the Divorce Act following a valid foreign divorce, and while it could adjudicate Family Law Act claims, these issues were already addressed in China.
The court ordered the child to attend the mother's preferred school for stability but expanded the father's parenting time due to the mother's unilateral conduct.
The applicant father brought a motion to determine the child's school registration, proposing École élémentaire Pierre-Elliott Trudeau (PET), while the respondent mother sought registration at École élémentaire La Mosaïque (La Mosaïque).
The court also addressed preliminary evidentiary challenges and the mother's pattern of unilateral decision-making.
The court found it was in the child's best interests to attend La Mosaïque for the 2024-2025 school year, emphasizing linguistic and cultural needs, and the practical advantage of proximity to the mother's residence and work for stability.
While the mother's choice of school was upheld for the year, her unilateral conduct was criticized, and the court issued temporary orders expanding the father's parenting time and mandating joint consultation on significant issues, with the school choice for future years remaining an issue for trial.
Interim access was denied to prevent psychological harm despite the mother's unproven abuse allegations.
Motion review of an ex parte order granting sole custody to the mother and terminating the father's access to the children.
The mother alleged extensive sexual abuse of the children by the father and sought to maintain the access suspension.
The father sought restoration of access and appointment of the Office of the Children's Lawyer.
The court found that while allegations of abuse existed, the evidence was largely unproven by child protection authorities and appeared to be filtered through the mother's accounts.
The court declined to order access at that time due to the psychological harm risk to the children, regardless of the veracity of the allegations, but expressed serious concerns about the mother's pattern of making escalating allegations and the Children's Aid Society's withdrawal from the matter.
