|
Family - Time Extension. Collins v. Tiveron
In Collins v. Tiveron (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed several motions in a family law appeal, here where the respondent was awarded sole custody of the children and child support.
Here the court considers a motion to extend time to commence an appeal, here in the family law context:[13] In civil litigation, the test for granting motions for extension of time requires a determination of whether an extension of time is in the interests of justice, bearing in mind (1) whether the moving party formed the requisite intention to appeal within the relevant time period, (2) the length of and explanation for the delay, (3) any prejudice to the responding party, and (4) the merits of the proposed appeal: Enbridge Gas Distributions Inc. v Froese, 2013 ONCA 131, 114 O.R. (3d) 636, at para. 15. In family law cases affecting the rights of children, the overarching inquiry into whether the extension is in the interests of justice is whether the extension would be in the best interests of the children: Denomme v. McArthur, 2013 ONCA 694, 36 R.F.L. (7th) 273, at para. 7; D.G. v. A.F., 2014 ONCA 436, at paras. 16, 33-34; Teitler v. Dale, 2021 ONCA 577, at para. 7; and Leybourne v. Powell, 2023 ONCA 421, at para. 7. . Van De Kerckhove v. Wagner
In Van De Kerckhove v. Wagner (Div Court, 2022) the Divisional Court considered extending the 15-day leave to appeal timeline, here in a family law case:[9] Rule 61.03(1)(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, states that where leave to appeal to the Divisional Court is required, the notice of motion for leave must be served within 15 days of the making of the order from which leave to appeal is sought. Pursuant to r. 3.02 of the Rules, the court may exercise its discretion to extend the time for service of a notice of motion for leave to appeal.
[10] In granting an extension of time, the court considers the following four factors identified by Swinton J. in Catalyst Capital Group Inc. v. Moyse, 2016 ONSC 554:. Whether the moving party formed an intention to appeal within relevant period;
. The length of the delay and the explanation for it;
. The prejudice to the responding party; and
. The merits of the appeal. [11] The governing principle is whether the justice of the case requires that an extension be given: Canadian Western Trust Co. v. 1324789 Ontario Inc., 2021 ONCA 23, at para. 24.
....
[17] This Court held that “the threshold for obtaining leave to appeal interlocutory orders in family law cases and costs orders is a high one.” Dale v. Teitler, 2018 ONSC 6861, at para. 9.
|
