“The applicant claims child support for both Ayden and Ava in accordance with the Child Support Guidelines. The respondent agrees that Ava is his “child” within the meaning of the Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.F.3 (“FLA”), however he denies that Ayden is his “child”. It is his position that Ayden has a biological father, and that the applicant’s new partner has also assumed a parental role with respect to Ayden since the parties’ separation.
Pursuant to s. 1(1) of the FLA, a “child” is defined as, “a person whom a parent has demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child of his or her family”.
In Chartier v. Chartier, 1999 CanLII 707 (SCC), [1999] 1 SCR 242, at para. 32, the Supreme Court found that a person who has demonstrated a settled intention to act as a child’s parent cannot unilaterally withdraw from that relationship upon separation. In determining whether a person has demonstrated a settled intention, the court must objectively examine the nature of the relationship between the person and the child prior to the separation. Every matter is assessed on its own facts, on a case-by-case basis.”