EK v RO

canada, canadian, case law, court opinion, canlii, abca, 2026abca293, 2026 abca 293 (canlii), 2026, abca, 293, (canlii), 2601-0208ac, 2026, family, parenting orders, appeal management, parenting reversal order transferring primary care and sole decision, making authority, no, contact period and counselling requirements, including practice note 7 therapeutic intervention, whether appellate relief should restore prior parenting arrangement pending appeal, application for stay denied, security for costs denied, no costs on applications, procedure, stay pending appeal, stay of enforcement, google inc v equustek solutions inc, 2017 scc 34 test applied, serious issue conceded and threshold for merit met, irreparable harm and balance of convenience assessed with reference to best interests of the children, stability and disruption pending appeal considered, stay denied, family, best interests of the child, parenting reversal, whether children would suffer irreparable harm if stay granted or denied, alleged disruption to schooling, activities, religious and spiritual development, and community ties weighed, evidence required beyond “mere disruption” per chow v richert, 2026 abca 79, remaining in father’s care not shown to irreparably harm the children, stay denied, procedure, security for costs, discretionary relief, alberta rules of court, alta reg 124/2010, r 4.22 factors considered, impecuniosity and ability to enforce and collect costs assessed, whether security would unduly prejudice ability to pursue appeal engaging best interests of the children, just and equitable to allow appeal to proceed without financial impediment, security for costs denied