The case involved an Appeal of a “Parenting Order” from the Court of Justice. The Appellant mother originally had primary parenting under an Interim Order from March 2022, while the father had weekend parenting time. The mother sought to maintain primary parenting. Both parties were self-represented litigants. In the Court below, the Trial Judge issued the Parenting Order granting the father primary parenting, with the mother having parenting time from Thursday after school to Saturday.

On appeal from the Court of Justice, pursuant to Rule 12.70(c), the Court of King’s Bench has the power to make “any order that the Court of Justice could have made.” Justice Loparco concluded that there was no error in finding that a shared parenting regime was in the best interests of the child. However, the Parenting Order did not reflect the statutory definition of shared parenting under Section 9 of the Alberta Child Support Guidelines, as it effectively granted the father primary parenting. This constituted a palpable and overriding error of mixed fact and law. The mother’s Appeal was allowed.

The mother also sought costs, including the reimbursement of the cost of the transcript ordered for the Appeal in the amount of $1,430.97. Pursuant to Rule 10.31(5), self-represented litigants are presumptively not entitled to costs unless exceptional circumstances are shown. However, self-represented litigants may be entitled to recover disbursements and GST, as these are not fees spent on counsel.  The Respondent father was therefore ordered to reimburse the cost of the transcript to the mother.