2022 QCCA 639, 2022 QCCA 639

Droit de la famille — 22731 2022 QCCA 639 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No.: 500-09-700074-222 ( 500-12-349024-202 ) (500-04-076457-200) MINUTES OF HEARING DATE: May 2, 2022 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE JULIE DUTIL, J.A. PATRICK HEALY, J.A. SUZANNE GAGNÉ, J.A. APPLICANT S. G. PRESENT AND Unrepresented RESPONDENT COUNSEL M. B. Mtre SARAH BINEAU By videoconference DESCRIPTION: Application for leave to appeal after the expiry of time limit from a judgment rendered on December 8, 2021 by the Honourable Aline U.K.

Quach of the Superior Court, District of Montreal (Article 363 C.C.P .) Clerk at the hearing : Robert Osadchuck Courtroom: Pierre-Basile-Mignault HEARING 12:11 Commencement of the hearing. Identification of counsel. 12:11 Submissions by Mr. S. G. 12:25 Submissions by Mtre Bineau. 12:25 Reply by Mr. S. G. 12:28 Recess of the hearing. 12:35 Resumption of the hearing. 12:35 By the Court: judgment - see page 3.

Robert Osadchuck, Clerk at the hearing JUDGMENT [ 1 ] The applicant seeks leave to appeal out of time against a judgment rendered on December 8, 2021, by the Honourable Madam Justice Quach of the Superior Court, District of Montreal, with respect to provisional measures, including parenting time with the children. [ 2 ] The motion was filed on April 19, 2022, after the time limit to seek leave had expired. In the applicant’s motion, he explains why he could not file the motion on time.

Even if the Court were to conclude that it was impossible for him to act earlier, the motion must be dismissed. [ 3 ] The applicant has failed to show a reviewable error and is asking the Court to reassess the evidence. The judge of first instance rendered a judgment in which she found that there was no urgency to order shared parenting time as the applicant had requested. In rendering judgment on parenting time, she considered the psychological expert report as well as the fact that the respondent agreed with the parenting time recommended in the report.

She mentioned that the parties must put their file in order so that a hearing date can be fixed rapidly. [ 4 ] Considering the standard of appellate review of provisional judgments in family matters, “leave to appeal will be granted only in exceptional circumstances, when the grounds of appeal are exceptionally serious, and most notably when there is a flagrant error, in fact or in law, in the judgment of first instance, which is of such a nature as to cause an irreparable prejudice to the petitioner”. [1] This is not the case in the present matter.

The applicant has not established that leave should be granted. [ 5 ] The Court emphasises that the issues raised by applicant are better left to consideration of the complete record by the Superior Court. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 6 ] DISMISSES the motion to leave to appeal, without costs. JULIE DUTIL, J.A. PATRICK HEALY, J.A.

SUZANNE GAGNÉ, J.A.