Opens in a new tab
Gelman Family Law Lawyers

Over 200+ 5-Star Google Reviews

Book Consult

Court Grants Mother Interim Sole Custody of Child

Published: July 31, 2019

Last Updated: March 23, 2026

Book Consult1-844-736-0200

Table of Contents

Court Grants Mother Interim Sole Custody of Child

An Ontario court recently considered the interesting question of whether or not it was appropriate to grant interim custody to a parent while proceedings were underway.

The Parties’ Story and Positions

The parties began living together in May 2014 and separated in October 2018. They had one child together, who was born in 2016.

The mother raised concerns related to the father’s alcohol use and his verbal and emotionally abusive behaviour. According to the mother, the father’s alcohol use led to financial difficulties and ultimately their separation. She also stated that she was the primary caregiver of the child and that the father had little awareness of the child’s special needs.

The father maintained that both he and the mother were inappropriate at times, using swearing and derogatory language towards the other. He disputed that the mother was the primary caregiver and that he did not understand the child’s needs.

Both the mother and father brought motions for interim custody of the child.

The Relevant Legal Principles

In determining what custodial and residential order to make, the court must consider the child’s best interests. Among other things, a guiding principle is that a child should have maximum contact with both parents, if it is consistent with their best interests. As a result, there is a presumption that regular access by a non-custodial parent is in the best interests of children. The right of a child to visit with a non-custodial parent, and to know and maintain (or form) an attachment to that parent, should only be surrendered in the most extreme and unusual circumstances. Furthermore, the court must ensure that the child will be physically and emotionally safe.

There are additional considerations when a party brings a motion for interim relief. In particular, in making an interim custody order, courts should generally maintain the status quo unless there are important reasons suggesting that change is necessary in the child’s best interests. Maintaining the status quo, where appropriate, is the least disruptive, most supportive and most protective for the child.

The Court’s Decision

The court granted interim sole custody to the mother, with access to the father. In arriving at this conclusion, the court noted that it was extremely concerned about the nature of the parties’ communication and the child’s exposure to parental conflict. Sadly, both parties had created a situation where the communication was toxic and highly inappropriate. However, the father’s comments were particularly concerning and indicated a serious lack of insight into the child’s interests. For example, a recording demonstrated that the father had told the child, “You probably don’t have any fun in your life anymore. Daddy bought those things for you. You probably have a shitty life now.”

Furthermore, in spite of his denial, the father’s alcohol use was clearly an important factor that led to the parties’ separation.

In this case, the evidence demonstrated that a joint custody order would not serve the child’s interests and would not result in any change in the current toxic relationship between the parties. There was no information indicating that the parties could communicate positively or had an ability to work together. As a result, the court concluded that an order for joint custody would only perpetuate the hostility and power struggles between the parties. It would also strongly increase the likelihood that the child would be exposed to further toxicity and parental conflict, which was not the child’s best interest.

The court also found that the mother was the primary caregiver at the time of separation, and that she was available to care for the child given that she was not presently working.

Lessons Learned

Any order dealing with custody and access of a child will be based on the best interests of the child, with those interests analyzed from the child’s perspective. Interim orders will have additional concerns for the court to consider.

Contact Gelman & Associates if you are involved in a separation or divorce and have questions about your rights. At Gelman & Associates, our lawyers provide exceptional legal representation in all family law matters. Our goal is to always empower clients to make informed decisions about their future. We give all prospective clients a comprehensive family law kit during their initial consultation, as well as a copy of our firm’s handbook on separation and divorce. This information is full of resources that will help you understand and navigate the difficult and often complicated separation and divorce process.

With six offices throughout Aurora, Barrie, Downtown Toronto, Mississauga, North York and Scarborough, we are easily accessible by transit and off-highway. Our phone lines are open Monday to Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Call us at (844) 736-0200, or contact us online to schedule an initial consultation.

 

Written by Lisa Gelman

Senior Lawyer

Senior Lawyer Lisa Gelman has over 25 years of family law experience and founded Gelman & Associates to provide strategic legal counsel in family law matters concerning divorce, parenting, separation, and more.

Frequently Asked Questions - child custody & access

Ontario law does not specify the age at which a child can decide which parent to live with. At most, the Court may consider the preference of the child but that does not necessarily mean that the Court will act favorably on it. The court will consider the child’s maturity, ability to articulate their desires, and the reasoning behind their views when seeking their opinion.

If a parenting plan is included in your court order under the Divorce Act, the document will be legally binding.

In order to change your child’s last name, you will have to be the child’s parent with legal custody or be the legal guardian of the child. In order to change the child’s last name, you will have to provide notice to anyone who has legal access to the child, and that may include your ex-spouse.

In most cases, the answer is no. However, there can be some exceptions that the mother can build a case upon. These include the father putting the child at risk, non-compliance with the court order, or a history of violence by the father.

Creating a custody plan with a narcissistic ex-partner is a task best left to legal professionals. While there might not be one way to deal with a narcissistic ex, there are things that you can do to turn the tables on a narcissistic co-parent. The best way to prevent problems is to go with no contact or limited contact with your ex-partner and put everything in writing if you must only communicate via email or text message to record statements and harassment.

Let us consider that the “moving away” is relocation and not just a change in residency.

Then, let us qualify that the mother will take your child with her.

If the mother is the primary caregiver of the child, you may oppose the relocation by applying the principles laid down under the Gordon vs. Goertz case. You must present your case strongly as to why potentially cutting your child’s relationship as the primary caregiver is to your child’s best interest. This situation falls under the purview of Section 16.93(2) of the Divorce Act.

If both you and the mother have equal parenting time over your child, the mother of the child has the burden of proof as to why the relocation is for the best interest of your child. This situation falls under the purview of Section 16.93(1) of the Divorce Act.

If there is no Court ordered, approved, or awarded parenting time or separation agreement, as contemplated under Section 16.93(3) of the Divorce Act, the mother has the burden of proof to show that relocation is in the best interest of your child.

Note that even if the burden of proof is not laid upon you, it still recommended that you present a strong opposition to the relocation.

Yes, it is possible for your ex to prevent you from relocating with a child you share, although this will likely plan on your parenting arrangements and decision-making responsibility. If you cannot agree about a relocation, a court will decide based on the child’s best interests.

Generally, you need to provide your ex with 60 days’ written notice of your relocation plan, and you must obtain consent or a court order to move the child. A lawyer can help you navigate this process. Our divorce lawyers will guide you through the application and court order process.

Yes, but they will need to establish paternity, especially if the father and the mother separate. Here are the ways to establish paternity as recognized by the court:

  • Act of birth
  • Presumption of paternity
  • Uninterrupted possession of status
  • Voluntary declaration

Locations We Serve

Multiple offices to help serve you better

With numerous offices across Ontario, we make it easier for our clients to have access to our lawyers. Please note that offices marked with an (**) are satellite offices and require a consultation booked in advance. We are not able to accommodate walk-in appointments at these locations. Call us to book a free consultation today.

Still have family law questions?

Speak to a lawyer

If you need legal advice regarding child custody & access matters in Ontario, contact our Toronto family law lawyers for a free consultation. Some conditions may apply.

Book Your Consult