CanLII
metadata only
Suznevich v. Giesbrecht
Decided: 2026-10-21. Docket: COA-26-CV-0448. Citation: 2026 ONCA 749 (CanLII). Family — Parenting orders — Motion to change — Material change in circumstances — Did the motion judge err in finding no material change justifying revisiting parenting time and decision-making responsibility — Consent order restricting proceedings to change before 2028 — Passage of time and child’s increased age insufficient without more — Appeal dismissed | Family — Children — Voice of the Child Report — Child’s wishes and preferences — Whether dismissing request for a VOC Report failed to give sufficient weight to the child’s views — Conflicting parental evidence alone insufficient — Court considered age and maturity and that report would serve no useful purpose — Appeal dismissed | Procedure — Costs — Discre
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Mizrachi v. Salah#1391031
- AH v DM#1120817
- R v Alleyne#1251762
- B.D.C. v T.J.C.#1251763
- CFA & Ors v AAI & Ors xxxx ( birth farther objections, failure of parental duty, best interests of the child) (Approved) [2026] IEHC 399 (19 May 2026)#303319
Record · ID 1426162
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive