|
Family - Appeal Route (2). Agha v. Fatima
In Agha v. Fatima (Ont Div Ct, 2025) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed a family law appeal under r.2.1 'Frivolous, Vexatious and Abusive Proceedings', this brought against various judicial directions.
Here the court considers CJA s.19(1) appeal routes:[2] The appellant husband seeks to appeal the December 17, 2024 order of Kraft J. following a family law trial. The trial addressed a range of issues, including child support, spousal support, whether an equalization payment was owing, post-separation adjustments, whether the husband’s interest in the matrimonial home should be transferred or vested in the wife’s name, and whether to make a restraining order against the husband. Kraft J.’s order was made in the context of a divorce application. She expressly made her support orders under the Divorce Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.).
....
[10] In this case, it is evident that the court does not have jurisdiction over the appeal. The appellant relies on s. 19(1)(a) of the CJA, which states that an appeal lies to the Divisional Court from a final order of a judge of the Superior Court of Justice, as described in subsections (1.1) and (1.2). Only subsection (1.2) could apply here, because the notice of appeal was filed after October 1, 2007. Subsection (1.2) limits the court’s jurisdiction to appeals from final orders for a single payment of not more than $50,000 or periodic payments of not more than $50,000. The payments Kraft J. ordered total more than $50,000.
[11] The appellant has also cited s. 19(1)(a.1) of the CJA, although he says this provision grants jurisdiction over appeals from interlocutory orders. Paragraph 19(1)(a.1) states an appeal lies to the Divisional Court from a final order of a judge of the Family Court made only under a provision of an Act or regulation of Ontario. This provision does not apply because Kraft J. is not a judge of the Family Court. Kraft J. sits, and the trial was heard, in Toronto. Under s. 21.1(5) of the CJA, Toronto is not an area in which the Family Court has jurisdiction. In addition, Kraft J.’s order was made under the Divorce Act, which is a federal statute. Her order therefore does not comply with the requirement in s. 19(1)(a.1) that it be made only under a provision of an act or regulation of Ontario.
[12] To the extent the appellant intended to rely on s. 19(1)(b) of the CJA, that provision does not apply because it grants the Divisional Court jurisdiction over appeals from interlocutory orders, with leave. Kraft J.’s order was not interlocutory.
|
