Mr. Abou-Mourad commenced an Action for divorce in Edmonton. Ms. Abourmourad applied to transfer the Action to Fort McMurray. Veit J. held that she had failed to establish it was unreasonable to carry on the Action in Edmonton on a balance of convenience. Justice Veit noted that Ms. Abourmourad was able to be involved in Applications via telephone rather than attend in person, pursuant to Rule 6.10. Should the balance of convenience change throughout the proceedings, Ms. Abourmourad could renew her Application for a transfer.

Ms. Abourmourad also applied for advance Costs for the proceedings, pursuant to Rules 12.36 and 4.2, relying on the great disparity between her husband’s income and her own. Veit J. held there was not yet any basis to award advanced Costs, particularly so early in the proceedings and where her ability to earn income was in dispute. Ms. Aboumourad’s Applications were dismissed.