Background   The parties experienced a tumultuous relationship from 2008 to 2019 and share three children. A Final Order issued in 2018 established child support and custody arrangements. The Applicant Father seeks to change this order, citing extreme parental alienation by the Respondent Mother in a high-conflict case. The Applicant filed a Motion to Change in 2020 and now requests interim relief. This case provides a great overview of the legal analysis in trying to change a final parenting order on a temporary basis.   Analysis   Justice Gibson provides a comprehensive overvi ..read more

Background   The case of Cooley v. Cooley involves a family law dispute with a complex history. The parties, who separated in 2017, share two young children. In 2020, an arbitration award granted the Respondent father parenting time, which was later incorporated into a court order in 2022. This order allowed for a review of the parenting schedule, which became the subject of the recent case conference.   Issue   The Respondent is trying to seek more parenting time. However, the question is whether the Respondent can proceed despite his past non-compliance with court orders. The ..read more

Introduction Tsarynny v. Topchiy revolved around the setting aside of a separation agreement. The parties had married in Ukraine in 2003 and later relocated to Canada. They separated in 2016. A separation agreement (SA) was formulated, renouncing equalization, specifying nominal spousal support, and with child support not in line with the Guidelines. The core of the dispute centred on the SA's validity and the determination of the separation date. Interestingly, this dispute arose in 2021 when the Applicant went to enforce the sale of the matrimonial home and deal with parenting and support is ..read more

Introduction The case of Welch v Welch, 2023 ONSC 6550 provides valuable insights into the complexities surrounding child support and the determination of income. This blog post focuses on a crucial legal issue within the case: the averaging of income pursuant to section 17 of the Child Support Guidelines. The parties, married in 2008 and divorced in 2016, have two children. The final order granted sole parenting time to the mother. The recent motion, initiated by the mother in 2022, seeks to modify child support based on the Guidelines, accounting for changes in income. This blog post focuses ..read more

Background/Introduction The case at hand involves the dissolution of the relationship between the Applicant father and the Respondent mother. The couple lived together from September 2012 until their separation on November 1, 2021, and they have two young daughters. Pleadings filed by the father include claims for sole decision-making responsibility, primary residence of the children, child support, a declaration of a trust in his favor regarding the family residence, and an order preventing the mother from depleting the net proceeds of the residence. This blog post focuses on the father’s pos ..read more

Introduction In the landscape of family law, disputes involving jurisdiction can add an additional layer of complexity. The case of Latreille v. Puyuttaq presents such a scenario. The Respondent, the child’s mother, asserts that the jurisdiction of Nunavut, not Ontario, should decide parenting matters concerning the child in this particular case. However, the Applicant brought the matter in Ontario. The Legal Issue The central legal issue in this case is the jurisdictional question: which court has the authority to determine parenting issues concerning the child? The Respondent argues that Nun ..read more

This family law case revolves around the modification of a child support order issued in October 2020 concerning the parties' son. The child finished his junior hockey career and commenced studies at university. He is enrolled in a four-year program. The Applicant is seeking an adjustment to child support and a contribution toward the child’s post-secondary education costs. Legal Issues 1. Whether the child qualifies as a "child of the marriage" after finishing junior hockey? 2. What child support should the Respondent pay during the time while the child is away at school? 3. What child suppor ..read more

Introduction The Applicant, in her evidence, contends that the Respondent has been depleting a line of credit secured against their matrimonial home since their separation. She alleges that he has withdrawn a substantial amount, ultimately threatening her financial interests. To safeguard her claims and preserve the matrimonial property's value, she seeks an order to freeze this line of credit. Additionally, the Applicant lays claim to a Toronto condo acquired during their marriage. She asserts that the property was bought with joint funds and seeks a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) ag ..read more

Introduction Decisions related to parenting are determined based the best interests of the child, as laid out in the law. A recent case, among others, has found utility in the ,AFCC Parenting Plan Guide,, especially for toddlers, when it comes to determining the best interests of a child. The current case, ,Wenter v. Khait, is a motion initiated by a father seeking an interim parenting schedule for his 29-month-old son after the separation of the parents. The mother, on the other hand, proposes a more gradual schedule of increasing parenting time. Although each parenting case is decided on the ..read more

Introduction Hunt v. Hunt is a 2023 decision by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (ONSC). One of the peripheral issues concerns the admissibility of evidence for a motion. Striking Some of the Father's Evidence The mother raised objections against certain pieces of evidence presented by the father, on the motion, prompting her to request their striking from the record. Specifically, the mother seeks the exclusion of exhibits "M," "N," "S," "T," "Q," "P," and "O" from the father's affidavit, which include: Exhibit "M": Excerpts of communications between the parents on the Family Wizard plat ..read more