2021 NLCA 25, 2021 NLCA 25

Michele Bowes (applicant/appellant) v. Cristopher Bowes (respondent) (20/37 & 20/43) Indexed As: Bowes v. Bowes 2021 NLCA 25 6 C.A.N.L.R. 560 Court of Appeal of Newfoundland and Labrador Butler J.A. April 20, 2021

Summary: Ms. Bowes sought an order for consolidation of her two appeals, or to have the two appeals heard together, pursuant to rule 13 of the Court of Appeal Rules . The first appeal is from an order that deals with compensatory access for a period of time in which Ms. Bowes was found to have wrongfully withheld access to the parties’ children. The second appeal is from an order which approved a change of school for only one of the parties’ three children. Held: Application to hear appeals together granted.

Butler J.A.: The two orders appealed from involve parenting matters determined within a short period of time and therefore have a sufficient nexus to warrant being heard together, but not consolidated. The application was granted (paragraph 6). Counsel: Appearing on her own behalf, the applicant/appellant; Appearing on his own behalf, the respondent. The application was heard and decision rendered orally on April 20, 2021 by Butler J.A.

The following memorandum of disposition was filed on May 4, 2021 by Butler J.A. ______________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OF DISPOSITION Butler J.A.: [ 1 ] Ms. Bowes seeks an order for consolidation of her two appeals or to have the two appeals heard together pursuant to rule 13 of the Court of Appeal Rules, NLR 38/16 . [ 2 ] The first appeal (202001H0037) addresses a May 12, 2020 order in which Ms. Bowes was found to have wrongfully withheld access to some of the parties’ children in the period April 27 – May 4, 2020. The judge granted Mr. Bowes 8 days of compensatory access.

In paragraph 4 of the order, the judge held that “(a)ny allegations by Michele Bowes of compensatory time owed in the past to her by Chris Bowes prior to this date are hereby dealt with as the denial of access during the period March 16-23, 2020 and March 30- April 7, 2020 were found to be not unreasonable. As of the date of this order, neither party is owed any further compensatory time for missed parenting time.” [ 3 ] Ms. Bowes’ appeal challenges the judge’s decisions (1) that Mr.

Bowes’ denial of access was not unreasonable and (2) that as of the date of the order, neither was entitled to compensatory time. [ 4 ] The second appeal addresses Ms. Bowes’ request to change schools for three of the parties’ five children. A June 2, 2020 order

by the same judge approved a change of school for only one of the children and denied it for the other two. [ 5 ] Ms. Bowes’ factums, appeal books and transcripts have been filed and served on Mr. Bowes. Mr. Bowes was initially uncertain whether he would take a position on either appeal but once he appreciated that Ms. Bowes was still pursuing her compensatory access time and the change in school for the two children in question, he indicated that he would file a factum, at least in 202001H0043. [ 6 ] The two orders involve parenting matters determined within a short time frame (May 12 – June 2, 2020).

They have sufficient nexus to warrant being held together but not consolidated. I would therefore make the following order under rule 13:

(1) The appeals in 202001H0037 and 202001H0043 should be heard together;

(2) Mr. Bowes shall have until May 10, 2021 to file his factum(s); and

(3) This application is set over to 10:30 am on June 8, 2021 to determine if the parties are ready to have a hearing date set. Application granted.