“Both parties in this motion agree that the court is generally very cautious in granting an interim order seeking a change in mobility or relocation given the summary nature of interim motions. The reported Ontario case of Plumley v. Plumley, (1999), 1999 CanLII 13990 (ON SC), makes the following statement at paragraph 7:
It appears to me that the following factors are or ought to be important in deciding the mobility issue on an interim basis:
1) A court will be more reluctant to upset the status quo on an interim basis and permit the move when there is a genuine issue for trial.
2) There can be compelling circumstances that might dictate that a judge ought to allow the move. For example, the move may result in a financial benefit to the family unit, which will be lost if the matter awaits a trial or the best interests of the children might dictate that they commence school at a new location.
3) Although there may be a genuine issue for trial, the move may be permitted on an interim basis if there is a strong probability that the custodial parent’s position will prevail at a trial.”