The court held the consent order allowed variation, not a de novo review, and increased spousal support because the payorâs line 150 income exceeded the agreed threshold for years.
The court allowed specific pleaded amendments that had effectively been consented to or were not prejudicial, but refused to add OSP as a plaintiff and refused derivative leave because the applicant failed to satisfy the s.4(2) statutory prerequisites (no reasonable notice to directors, lack of good faith, and substantial limitation period barriers making the derivative claim unlikely to succeed); disclosure claims were dismissed because respondents' production was adequate and nonâparty requests were irrelevant or overbroad; costs awarded to defendants.
Source excerpt
Amendment of pleadings
Derivative action/leave to bring action on behalf of company
Interim family-law application for child support and expenses. The court denied retroactive reassessment back to 2000, imputed income at $138,000, and ordered ongoing support.
The court found deliberate financial non-disclosure, imputed income to the respondent, awarded retroactive child support, ordered trust repayment, and limited parenting time pending counselling.
The court ordered disclosure of records, a parenting report, witness materials, and further trial scheduling in a contested family proceeding, while refusing immediate overnight parenting time.
On family-law applications, the court refused to order private school tuition, ordered equal sharing of orthodontic and other s. 7 expenses, and referred spousal support to trial.
The court ordered limited third-party disclosure, found the plaintiff in contempt for several access breaches, and declined to suspend her continued access to V.
Application for spousal and child maintenance. The court imputed income to the defendant, ordered support, and granted production of financial records.