J. Q.B.M. A.D. 1989 No. 575 J.C.R. IN THE QUEEN'S BENCH (FAMILY LAW DIVISION) JUDICIAL CENTRE OF REGINA BETWEEN: JODI-LIN ROYAL RESPONDENT (APPLICANT) and DAVID WOLBAUM APPLICANT (RESPONDENT) M.L. Senko for respondent (applicant) D. Wolbaum on his own behalf FIAT DOVELL J. March 23, 1998 [1] Denby Elizabeth Royal, presently 10 years of age, isa child of the common law relationship of the parties. [2] After Denby's parents separated they entered into aCustody and Maintenance Agreement on June 22, 1989. [3] On page of the Agreement the parties agreed as 5. Duration of Agreement (a) The parties agree that it is in the best interests of the child that the Father and the child continue to have contact and access with each other and that the Father continue to pay maintenance as set forth herein, regardless of the marriage of the Father or the Mother to, or the adoption of the child by, someone other than the Father or the Mother. [4] Subsequent to entering into this Agreement the relationship between the parties at best can only be described as tumultuous. Jodi-Lin married for short period of time and in August, 1997 she moved to Nelson, British Columbia with Denby. By that time David Wolbaum had not seen his daughter for almost three years. [5] The first time Denby saw her father in over three years was last December. An Order for specified access was made by McIntyre J. to facilitate two access visits while she was in Regina. [6] As the parties could not agree upon ongoing accessthey once again appeared on February 25th, last. The father, who is now representing himself, argued that he should be granted access to his daughter every second weekend, every second Christmas and Easter and two weeks in the summer, all unsupervised. He admitted that as Denby is now living in British Columbia realistically he could probably only exercise any access rights two or three times per year and even at that he may not be able to afford to travel that many times. [7] In my opinion, David Wolbaum's generous and farreaching requests are not reasonable at this time given hislengthy record of non-contact with his daughter. It isimportant that he be reintroduced to his daughter in a gradualand consistent fashion. [8] Accordingly, David Wolbaum shall have access toDenby Elizabeth Royal as follows:1. On March 27, 1998 for a period of three hours andMarch 28, 1998 for a period of four hours or suchother two days in the months of March or April, 1998for the same number of hours at Nelson, BritishColumbia. 2. Two days before the end of June, 1998, such accessto take place at David's parents', Tony and LorraineWolbaum's, farm residence including overnightaccess. It is expected that Denby will be travelling to Saskatchewan before the end of June and accordingly David should be given an opportunity to see his daughter during that time period; 3. Two days in the summer of 1998 at Nelson, BritishColumbia. David is to provide Jodi-Lin with at least thirty days notice of which days he will be exercising his rights of access. The days must be approved by Jodi-Lin and Denby. 4. The weekly telephone access shall continue eachSunday evening and such other times during the weekthat do not interfere with Denby's activities. 5. Access shall once again be reviewed in the fall of1998 at the request of either party upon providingfive days' notice. [9] Copy of this Fiat to be sent to David Wolbaum at: 3015 Assiniboine Avenue, Regina, Saskatchewan. The file is then to be brought to the attention of McIntyre J. for decision on variation of child maintenance application.
FIAT. The parties entered a custody and maintenance agreement with respect to the one child of their common law relatinship in 1989. The mother moved with the daughter to British Columbia in 1997. The parties did not agree upon ongoing access. HELD: The father's generous and far reaching requests were not reasonable at this time given his lengthy non-contact. It was important that he be reintroduced to his 10 year old daughter in a gradual and consistent fashion. He was granted access intitially for three and four hours in both provinces, then two days at the father's parent's home including overnight access and two days in the summer in British Columbia. Weekly telephone access was to continue each Sunday evening. Access was to be reviewed in the fall of 1998.