Perron v. Perron

JurisdictionOntario
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ontario)
JudgeSharpe, J.A.
Citation(2011), 286 O.A.C. 178 (CA),2011 ONCA 776
Date29 November 2011

Perron v. Perron (2011), 286 O.A.C. 178 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2011] O.A.C. TBEd. DE.012

Monique Denise Perron (maintenant Waring) (requérante/intimée/auteure de la motion) v. Joseph Ferdinand Dave Perron (intimé/appelant/partie intimée)

(M40603; C51977; 2011 ONCA 776)

Indexed As: Perron v. Perron

Ontario Court of Appeal

Sharpe, J.A.

December 9, 2011.

Summary:

A trial judge awarded sole custody of the children of the marriage to the mother and generous access to the father. The father appealed. The mother moved for security for costs of the appeal and an adjournment of the appeal hearing.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, per Sharpe, J.A., allowed the motion, awarding security for costs of $15,000.

Practice - Topic 8209

Costs - Security for costs - Security for costs of an appeal - Grounds for - Special circumstances or other good reasons - A trial judge awarded sole custody of the children of the marriage to the mother and generous access to the father - The trial judge also awarded costs of $56,000 to the mother - The father appealed, asserting that the trial judge failed to properly consider the father's and children's language rights under s. 23 of the Charter in awarding sole custody to the mother - The mother moved for security for costs of the appeal - The Ontario Court of Appeal, per Sharpe, J.A., allowed the motion, awarding security for costs of $15,000 - In light of the trial judge's conclusions with respect to the father's parenting deficiencies and the fact that joint custody was not appropriate for the children, the court found that it was very unlikely that an appeal panel would interfere with the trial judge's findings on the basis of language rights - It would be unjust to expose the mother to the risk that the father might not be able to pay the costs of the appeal - See paragraphs 9 to 26.

Authors and Works Noticed:

Bastarache, Michel, dir., Les droits linguistiques au Canada (2nd Ed. 2004), p. 420 [para. 17].

Counsel:

Aaron Franks and Michael Zalev, for the respondent/applicant;

Mark Power, François Larocque and Jo-Anne Thibodeau, for the appellant/respondent.

This motion was heard on November 29, 2011, in Chambers, by Sharpe, J.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal, who delivered the following decision on December 9, 2011.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
22 practice notes
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (April 7-11, 2025)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • April 16, 2025
    ...651, York University v. Markicevic, 2017 ONCA 651, Lavallee v. Isak, 2022 ONCA 290, Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, Gauthier Estate v. White, 2022 ONCA 846, 798839 Ontario Ltd. v. Platt, [2014] O.J. No. 6077 (C.A.) Hillier v. Ontario, 2025 ONCA 259 Keywor......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (March 15 ' 19, 2021)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • March 22, 2021
    ...Vexatious, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 61.06(1)(a) and (c), Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation, 2017 ONCA 827, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, 2010 ONCA 633, Foodinvest Limited v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2020......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (March 29 ' April 2, 2021)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • April 6, 2021
    ...1581, Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation, 2017 ONCA 827, Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, 2010 ONCA 633, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776 (In Chambers), Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89 (In Chambers), York University v. Markicevic, 2017 ONCA 651 (In Chambers) Laurentian Univers......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (December 1 ' 5, 2025)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • December 12, 2025
    ...Inc. v. Flesch, 2010 ONCA 633, Stride v. Syra Group Holdings, 2025 ONCA 265, Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, Gauthier Estate v. White, 2022 ONCA 846, 2363523 Ontario Inc. v. Nowack, 2018 ONCA 414, Donaldson International Livestock Ltd. v. Znamensky Selekc......
  • Get Started for Free
16 cases
  • M.B. v. L.B.
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (New Brunswick)
    • January 9, 2020
    ...if the Court ignores that court processes have been ‘weaponized’ and turned against innocents” (para. 667). [15] In Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, [2011] O.J. No. 5580 (QL), an appeal was summarily dismissed on the basis it had a “very low prospect of success”, and it was “very unlikely” ......
  • Shaver-Kudell Manufacturing Inc. v. Knight Manufacturing Inc.
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • March 30, 2021
    ...of success and the appellant has the ability to pay costs, but it would be nearly impossible to collect such costs: Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, 286 O.A.C. 178 (In Chambers), at para. 23; Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, 345 O.A.C. 231 (In Chambers), at para. 27. Other examples includ......
  • Stride v Syra Group Holdings
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Ontario)
    • April 7, 2025
    ...9-12; Lavallee v. Isak, 2022 ONCA 290, at paras. 34-38; Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, 345 O.A.C. 231, at para. 27; Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, 345 D.L.R. (4th) 513, at paras. 21-23; Gauthier Estate v. White, 2022 ONCA 846, at paras. 20-21; 798839 Ontario Ltd. v. Platt, [2014] O.J.......
  • 2025 ONCA 265
    • Canada
    • January 1, 2025
    ...9-12; Lavallee v. Isak, 2022 ONCA 290, at paras. 34-38; Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, 345 O.A.C. 231, at para. 27; Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, 345 D.L.R. (4th) 513, at paras. 21-23; Gauthier Estate v. White, 2022 ONCA 846, at paras. 20-21; 798839 Ontario Ltd. v. Platt, [2014] O.J.......
  • Get Started for Free
6 firm's commentaries
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (April 7-11, 2025)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • April 16, 2025
    ...651, York University v. Markicevic, 2017 ONCA 651, Lavallee v. Isak, 2022 ONCA 290, Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, Gauthier Estate v. White, 2022 ONCA 846, 798839 Ontario Ltd. v. Platt, [2014] O.J. No. 6077 (C.A.) Hillier v. Ontario, 2025 ONCA 259 Keywor......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (March 15 ' 19, 2021)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • March 22, 2021
    ...Vexatious, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 61.06(1)(a) and (c), Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation, 2017 ONCA 827, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, 2010 ONCA 633, Foodinvest Limited v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2020......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (March 29 ' April 2, 2021)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • April 6, 2021
    ...1581, Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation, 2017 ONCA 827, Combined Air Mechanical Services Inc. v. Flesch, 2010 ONCA 633, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776 (In Chambers), Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89 (In Chambers), York University v. Markicevic, 2017 ONCA 651 (In Chambers) Laurentian Univers......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (December 1 ' 5, 2025)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • December 12, 2025
    ...Inc. v. Flesch, 2010 ONCA 633, Stride v. Syra Group Holdings, 2025 ONCA 265, Henderson v. Wright, 2016 ONCA 89, Perron v. Perron, 2011 ONCA 776, Gauthier Estate v. White, 2022 ONCA 846, 2363523 Ontario Inc. v. Nowack, 2018 ONCA 414, Donaldson International Livestock Ltd. v. Znamensky Selekc......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
  • Evidence; procedure; costs
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2020
    • June 23, 2019
    ...has a low prospect of success and engaged in conduct that unnecessarily added to the cost and length of the proceeding: Perron v Perron, 2011 ONCA 776 (CanLII). at para. 21 to 23; or the party had deliberately accumulated the arrears: Stelter v Stelter , 2013 ONCA 508 (CanLII), at paras. 5 ......
  • Evidence; Procedure; Costs
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2024
    • Invalid date
    ...has a low prospect of success and engaged in conduct that unnecessarily added to the cost and length of the proceeding: Perron v Perron, 2011 ONCA 776 at para. 21 to 23; or the party had deliberately accumulated the arrears: Stelter v Stelter, 2013 ONCA 508 (CanLII), at paras. 5 and 11. But......
  • Evidence; Procedure; Costs
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Child Support Guidelines in Canada, 2022
    • July 27, 2022
    ...has a low prospect of success and engaged in conduct that unnecessarily added to the cost and length of the proceeding: Perron v Perron, 2011 ONCA 776 at para. 21 to 23; or the party had deliberately accumulated the arrears: Stelter v Stelter, 2013 ONCA 508 (CanLII), at paras. 5 and 11. But......