2013 ONSC 2533, 2013 ONSC 2533

CITATION : Kucharik v. Julien 2013 ONSC 2533 COURT FILE NO.: 287/08 DATE: 2013-04-29 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEE N: ) ) Laurie Kucharik and Mark Kucharik ) ) ) Timothy Pedwell, for the Applicants ) Applicants ) ) - and - ) ) ) Melissa Julien ) ) ) Chris Young, for the Respondent ) Respondent ) ) ) THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE J. R. HENDERSON ENDORSEMENT ON COSTS [ 1 ] This is my decision as to costs arising from this motion to change. [ 2 ] Melissa Julien (“Melissa”) brought the motion in which she requested that the existing order be changed to provide that Melissa have sole custody of her son, Conner.

In the alternative, Melissa requested that she have increased access time with Conner as well as increased access to information about Conner from the medical and school authorities. [ 3 ] By way of my written decision, released on March 19, 2013, I found that Melissa had made significant improvements in her life. However, I found that it was in Conner’s best interests for him to remain in the sole custody of the Kuchariks, with access to Melissa.

Then, in order to deal with some of the issues regarding access and the provision of information, I ordered certain changes to be made to the existing court order. [ 4 ] Melissa now submits that she has been able to achieve some changes to the existing order, and therefore she requests her costs of the motion. [ 5 ] In my view, neither party is truly the successful party in this proceeding. Although Melissa achieved some changes to the existing order, the main focus of her motion was her request for custody of Conner. In that respect, her motion was not successful.

From another perspective, the Kuchariks were able to successfully defend the primary request from Melissa. [ 6 ] Furthermore, it was apparent during the hearing that both sides were before the court because both had a genuine interest in the welfare of Conner. Conner has some significant medical issues, and certainly benefits from all of these parties taking an interest in his welfare. A punitive costs order would perhaps discourage the parties from dealing with these issues. [ 7 ] For these reasons, there will be no costs to either party.

Henderson, J. Released: April 29, 2013 CITATION : Kucharik v. Julien 2013 ONSC 2533 COURT FILE NO.: 287/08 DATE: 2013-04-29

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: Laurie Kucharik and Mark Kucharik Applicant Applicants – and – Melissa Julien Respondent endorsement on costs Henderson, J. Released: April 29, 2012