“Counsel agreed that, if parents cannot agree on which school their child should attend, and the court is called upon to make the decision, the best interests of the child govern. (Askalan v. Taleb, [2012] O.J. No. 3947 at para. 32 (S.C.J.))
In Thomas v. Osika, 2018 ONSC 2712 (CanLII), [2018] O.J. No. 3321 (S.C.J.), at paragraph 37, Justice Audet set out a number of general principles taken from the caselaw “to assist the decision-maker” when making a decision of this nature in the child’s best interests. They include:
a. a consideration of the child’s unique needs, circumstances, aptitudes, and attributes;
b. focusing on the interests of the child rather than those of the parents, or their rights;
c. whether a school placement or educational program will promote and maintain a child’s cultural and linguistic heritage;
d. assessing any impact on the stability of the child, which may include examining whether there is any prospect of one of the parties moving in the near future; where the child was born and raised; whether a move will mean new childcare providers or other unsettling features;
e. a consideration of any problems with the proposed schools; and
f. a consideration of the resources that each school offers in relation to a child’s needs, rather than on proximity of either school to the residence of one parent or the other, or the convenience that the child’s attendance at the nearest school would entail.”