“In Richardson v. Richardson, 2019 ONCA 983, the majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal found that in making parenting decisions, the court is not limited by the positions that parties take before it or by the terms of their settlement.
In fact, even when presented with a settlement, the court has the authority to review and reject it if it fails to meet the best interests of the child. That is because the court is required to determine any parenting issue before it based only on the child’s best interests. Of course, that remedy should be exercised with caution and rarely invoked. Mere disagreement with the agreed upon terms is not sufficient to set them aside. Any decision to set aside an agreement must consider the benefits to the children of a compromise resolution rather than a litigated one. Further, the court must fully explain both the rejection of the parties’ proposed resolution and any reason that the judge did not inform the parties the concerns with their proposed resolution. In that way, the parties can attempt to address them.”
Spadacini-Kelava v. Kelava, 2020 ONSC 5561 (CanLII) at 122-123