2017 ONSC 256, 2017 ONSC 256

Cameron v. Cameron, CITATION : 2017 ONSC 256 COURT FILE NO.: 23860/13 DATE: 2017-01-12 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO RE: Michiko Cameron, Applicant AND: Robert Joseph Francis Cameron, Respondent BEFORE: Mr Justice Ramsay COUNSEL: none HEARD: January 11, 2017 at Welland ENDORSEMENT [ 1 ] The parties have joint custody and shared residence of two children under a final order made by me on January 12, 2015. The parties’ daughter is 14 years old. Their son is almost 10. The custody order does not deal with travel outside the country.

The mother moves to change the order to permit her to take the children to Japan for a vacation without the father’s consent. [ 2 ] The father does not want the children to go to Japan. He is afraid that they will not be brought back. His apprehension is based on the following: a. The mother has a history of attempting to deny him contact with the children. b. While Japan is a signatory of the Hague Convention, it does not have a history of enforcing its terms and returning children from Japan. c.

The father has inquired of the Japanese authorities and been told that he would have no standing as a parent of either child under Japanese law. The daughter is his stepdaughter and the son, of whom he is the biological father, was conceived during the mother’s previous marriage, with the result that the wife’s previous husband is the legal father of the boy in the eyes of Japanese law. d.

The wife has deeper ties to Japan than to Canada. [ 3 ] It would be beneficial to the children to see the country of their mother’s birth and to spend time with their extended family there, in particular their maternal grandmother. I have to balance this, however, with their interest in continuing their relationship with both parents. [ 4 ] The father, like the mother, is a custodial and residential parent. I think his concerns should be given as much weight as the mother’s.

He is clearly concerned for the children’s welfare and I have to confess that I, too, am not ready to rely solely on the mother’s word on this issue, given her history and the lack of accountability that would be available in the circumstances. If this means that the children cannot go to Japan until they are older, to my mind that unfortunate consequence is outweighed by the competing considerations. They should not leave Canada without the consent of both parents. [ 5 ] The motion is dismissed without costs. J.A. Ramsay J. Date: 2017-01-12