Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Post-judgment family law applications were dismissed in large part, with only a small correction to prior reasons, a s. 211 report cost order, judgment for the claimant, and release of trust funds.
The late-filed report was excluded because the applicants failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances: the report had limited probative value (parties had already admitted the child’s wishes and there was no evidence the child’s cognitive or communicative ability was in issue), it was not in the interest of justice or the child’s best interests (obtained unilaterally without engaging the father and contrary to standards), and its admission would cause significant prejudice and disrupt an imminent contested parenting hearing.
Source excerpt
The court valued the defendant’s fish brokerage company, imputed income based on undisclosed benefits and personal expenses, and awarded retroactive and ongoing support plus property division.
The court held the plaintiffs’ claim had been settled for $6,000 each, but deferred costs issues under Rule 37B to the trial judge hearing the counterclaim.
The court exercised its discretion under Rule 55 to treat the respondents' motion as effectively invoking reconsideration and ruled that because success on the stay motion was divided—Novopharm obtained a damages undertaking—the appropriate outcome was that each party bear their own costs of the stay motion; separately, Novopharm was awarded $1,500 for the subsequent costs motion.
Source excerpt
Interlocutory family-law ruling on custody, support, income attribution and retroactivity, with shared care ordered and income attributed at CAD 200,000.
Although the appellants did not prove service within the prescribed period, they demonstrated a bona fide intention to appeal, respondent suffered no prejudice from service less than 20 days late, and the interests of justice required relief; accordingly the court granted an extension of time and deemed the notice of appeal filed October 18, 2002 and served November 6, 2002 to be filed and served in accordance with the Rules.
Source excerpt
Explore more
