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
The applicant failed to meet the high onus to show actual or reasonably apprehended bias; criticisms of prior decisions and perceived procedural unfairness are matters for appeal, not recusal; the s.211 report had been ordered and the court's scheduling directions do not demonstrate a predetermined outcome, therefore recusal was not justified and the application is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Equal parenting was denied because the respondent has not demonstrated willingness and capacity to cooperate with claimant or to prioritize and reliably manage the childrens' extensive therapeutic, educational and routine needs given his hostility, unreliable history and resistance to joint management; court maintained primary residence with claimant, adjusted and slightly expanded respondent's parenting time, fixed child support on respondent income of $38,393 (producing $585/month effective April 1, 2026), apportioned s.7 special/extraordinary expense shares (claimant 71%, respondent 29%) r…
Source excerpt
The Ramsay interim order was varied because developments since the initial order (mother's move to West Vancouver and a concrete preschool plan) constituted compelling reasons; the Twins' best interests require stability by attending local preschool, weekday parenting allocation to the mother to support that stability, and limiting long uninterrupted periods of parenting by the father due to credible findings of family violence and documented anger-management concerns; communication/conduct restrictions in the Ramsay Order remain in force; a s.211 FLA report is ordered to assess all three chi…
Source excerpt
The court held that a review of 'Parenting Time' in the consent order permits de novo consideration of parenting time, including shared parenting, despite a provision that the children 'principally reside' with the Respondent; an immediate s.211 report was unnecessary and should be deferred until after a transitional increase in parenting time, and on the merits a sudden move to 50/50 was not in the children's best interests so an intermediate increased schedule was ordered; costs were awarded to the Respondent as the substantially successful party on the central issue.
Source excerpt
The court varied an interim parenting order to reflect equal shared parenting, ordered a s. 211 report about A.B., refused exclusive occupancy, and dismissed retroactive child support.
The court dismissed a recusal application in this family law proceeding, holding that dissatisfaction with interlocutory rulings and alleged bias did not meet the legal test.
The court awarded the respondent costs for the September 25 and October 1, 2024 parenting-time hearing, but declined costs thrown away and double costs.
Trial family-law reasons addressing parenting, support, property division, and protection orders. The Court kept shared parenting, ordered child support, and divided property with exclusions.
The court granted the claimant interim unsupervised parenting time, joint and shared custody, and equal parental responsibilities, and adjourned the s. 211 issue generally.
Interim family law reasons set a phased parenting schedule, cancel a protection order, replace it with conduct orders, and deny a police enforcement clause.
Explore more
