http://canlii.ca/t/j9xn6
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: H.P., Applicant AND L.V., Respondent
BEFORE: The Honourable Mr. Justice A. Pazaratz
HEARD: October 2, 2020
Very interesting case and short and to the point. Justice Pazaratz provides some insight into some of the questions that often get asked here and how judges see them.
... more...
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: H.P., Applicant AND L.V., Respondent
BEFORE: The Honourable Mr. Justice A. Pazaratz
HEARD: October 2, 2020
Very interesting case and short and to the point. Justice Pazaratz provides some insight into some of the questions that often get asked here and how judges see them.
[7] But – as happens on many of these early motions – even though the parents have presented dramatically different recollections of the past, their proposals for future timesharing arrangements are remarkably similar. So similar that it really raises a question about whether the parents needed to say so many bad things about one another if so little was in dispute.
[8] The bottom line: they both agree there should be generous timesharing – including mid-week overnights -- with no controls or restrictions on either parent’s involvement with the children.
[9] The only thing that matters in this senseless tug of war is the best interests of the children. And I heard nothing within the litany of mutual complaints which would favour one parent’s position over the other’s.
a. If six overnights is fine, why would seven overnights be unthinkable?
b. If seven overnights is fine, why would six overnights be unthinkable?
c. In either scenario, the experience for the children is going to be very similar.
d. This dispute isn’t really about what’s best for the children.
e. It’s about winning and losing, and what each parent feels is best for them.
f. We need to take the “winning” and “losing” out of family court.
g. That’s what’s best for the children.
[8] The bottom line: they both agree there should be generous timesharing – including mid-week overnights -- with no controls or restrictions on either parent’s involvement with the children.
a. The Applicant proposes a two-week rotating schedule – often described as 2-2-3 – which would give him 7 out of 14 overnights with the children.
b. The Respondent proposes a repeating one-week schedule which would give the father 6 out of 14 overnights with the children.
c. Why did we need so many expensive, destructive affidavits – why did I need to hear all the hurtful allegations that people will remember forever – if the only thing in dispute is a single overnight every two weeks?
b. The Respondent proposes a repeating one-week schedule which would give the father 6 out of 14 overnights with the children.
c. Why did we need so many expensive, destructive affidavits – why did I need to hear all the hurtful allegations that people will remember forever – if the only thing in dispute is a single overnight every two weeks?
[9] The only thing that matters in this senseless tug of war is the best interests of the children. And I heard nothing within the litany of mutual complaints which would favour one parent’s position over the other’s.
a. If six overnights is fine, why would seven overnights be unthinkable?
b. If seven overnights is fine, why would six overnights be unthinkable?
c. In either scenario, the experience for the children is going to be very similar.
d. This dispute isn’t really about what’s best for the children.
e. It’s about winning and losing, and what each parent feels is best for them.
f. We need to take the “winning” and “losing” out of family court.
g. That’s what’s best for the children.
[14] So we’re back to a one day difference every two weeks. And truthfully, no matter which of those options I select, I have confidence that the children will be fine.
a. It’s not the “one day” that’s going to ruin these children’s lives.
b. It’s the senseless, bitter dispute about the one day that’s going to ruin these children’s lives.
b. It’s the senseless, bitter dispute about the one day that’s going to ruin these children’s lives.
Comment