“In Thomas v. Osika, 2018 ONSC 2712, 13 R.F.L. (8th) 191, at para. 37, Audet J. stated that when parents disagree, the decision with respect to the choice of school is ultimately a matter of judicial discretion. Her Honour summarized a number of general principles that have emerged from the case law to assist the court in making a decision that is in the child’s best interests. These include:
a. In developing a child’s educational plan, the unique needs, circumstances, aptitudes and attributes of the child must be taken into account;
b. When considering school placement, one factor to be considered is the ability of the parent to assist the child with homework and the degree to which the parent can participate in the child’s educational program;
c. The emphasis must be placed on the interests of the child and not on the interests or rights of the parents;
d. The importance of a school placement or educational program to promoting the child’s linguistic and cultural heritage;
e. Whether there is any prospect of one of the parties moving in the near future and whether a move will mean new childcare providers or other unsettling features;
f. The court will look to any decisions that were made by the parents prior to the separation or at the time of separation with respect to schooling;
g. Any problems with the existing or proposed school will be considered;
h. Proximity to the residence of one parent or the other or their convenience are not determinative. A decision as to the choice of school should be made on its own merits and the child’s needs;
i. Third-party ranking systems should not factor into the court’s decision because these systems do not take into account the best interest of a particular child;
j. If an aspect of a child’s life, such as school placement, is to be disrupted by an order of the court, there must be good reason to do so. Before a court will order a child to transfer schools, there must be convincing evidence that the change is in the child’s best interests.
Any change of school must be considered from the child’s perspective. A school-age child will likely have already formed attachments to the school he or she attends. Continuing the child’s existing school placement promotes stability in the child’s life: Ursic v. Ursic (2006), 2006 CanLII 18349 (ON CA), 32 R.F.L. (6th) 23 (Ont. C.A.), at para. 32.
A child’s need for stability, consistency and familiar supportive relationships is often heightened during the emotionally stressful period of parental separation: Lang v Qureshi, 2025 ONSC 585, at para 37.”