1.2: Purpose and intention of these rules
7.10: Judge remains seized of action
7.11: Order for trial
7.5: Application for judgment by way of summary trial

Case Summary

The divorced parties had a lengthy history of litigation regarding the parenting terms for their two children. The father brought an Application to vary the parenting terms of a Corollary Relief Order which was ultimately addressed by way of Summary Trial pursuant to Part 7, Division 3. Miller J. provided an overview of the history of disputes between the parties on the issue of parenting dealt with by the Court. This included a total of four Provincial Court Orders, the Divorce Judgment and Corollary Relief Order, and at least four further Orders in the Court of Queen’s Bench. In light of this background, Miller J. referred to the purpose and intention of the Rules, as stated in Rule 1.2, in declaring that resolution of these types of issues or disputes are best reached using a Summary Trial. Here, the Summary Trial would present the opportunity for the parties to testify under oath and have the issue of parenting dealt with rather than incurring further costs in a litigation war.

View CanLII Details