Family Law · Parenting Time & Decision-Making

Child Custody Lawyer in Toronto

Reviewed by Fadi Matthew Kazandji, Founding Partner, Kazandji Law · Toronto family law · Last reviewed: July 2026

No part of a separation matters more than your children. Where they live, who decides about their schooling and medical care, and how much time they spend with each parent are questions that shape a child's whole life, and they are the questions that cause parents the most fear. The good news is that Ontario law now gives those questions a clear, child-centred framework, and a well-prepared case can make a real difference.

At Kazandji Law, our Toronto family lawyers act for parents across Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area on every kind of parenting dispute, from negotiating a workable schedule to contested court applications, relocation cases, and enforcement when a parenting order is ignored. This page uses the current legal terminology throughout, but because so many people still search for “custody” and “access,” we flag the old terms where it helps. If you would rather talk it through now, call 647-588-3234 for a free, confidential consultation.

One idea runs through everything below: the law is no longer about parental “rights” to a child, it is about the child's best interests. Courts do not award “custody” as a prize. They allocate responsibilities and time in whatever way best serves the particular child in front of them.^[1] Understanding that shift is the single most important step in approaching a parenting case realistically.

From “custody and access” to “decision-making and parenting time”

If you were separated before 2021, or you remember a friend's divorce from years ago, you probably think in terms of “custody” and “access.” Those words are gone from the statutes. On March 1, 2021, sweeping amendments to the federal Divorce Act came into force, and Ontario made matching changes to its Children's Law Reform Act (CLRA) through the Moving Ontario Family Law Forward Act, 2020.^[1][3] The change was not just cosmetic. The old language framed a child almost as property to be “won,” with a “winner” who got custody and a “loser” relegated to access. The new language is deliberately neutral and child-focused.

The terms still appear in older orders and agreements, and in everyday conversation, and the CLRA even contains bridging provisions confirming that a reference to “custody” now includes decision-making responsibility, and a reference to “access” includes parenting time or contact.^[3] But when you go to court or negotiate a new agreement today, this is the vocabulary that applies:

Which statute applies depends on your situation. Married spouses seeking a divorce fall under the federal Divorce Act; unmarried parents, and married parents who are not pursuing a divorce, are dealt with under Ontario's CLRA. The two regimes were deliberately harmonized in 2021, so the core concepts and the best-interests test are now very similar under both.^[1][3]

Decision-making responsibility vs. parenting time

These are two separate things, and it is common for one parent to have more of one than the other. Keeping them distinct is essential to understanding your case.

Decision-making responsibility

This is the authority to make the major decisions in a child's life. Under both the CLRA and the Divorce Act, it covers significant decisions about the child's well-being, including health, education, culture, language, religion and spirituality, and significant extra-curricular activities.^[3] Decision-making responsibility can be allocated to one parent alone, to both parents jointly, or divided by subject area, for example, one parent making education decisions and both sharing health decisions. The Divorce Act expressly allows responsibility (or any aspect of it) to be allocated “to either spouse, to both spouses,” or to another eligible person, in any combination.^[5] There is no automatic rule that decision-making must be shared equally; it depends entirely on what serves the child.

Parenting time

Parenting time is simply the time a child is in a parent's care. Importantly, the parent who has the child during a given period ordinarily has the authority to make day-to-day decisions during that time, things like routine, meals, and everyday activities, even if the other parent holds decision-making responsibility for the major issues.^[5] Parenting time can be allocated by a detailed schedule, and both parents are generally entitled to ask for and receive information about the child's health, education, and overall well-being unless a court orders otherwise.^[5]

A quick note on old vocabulary: what people used to call “sole custody” is closest to one parent having the bulk of parenting time and sole decision-making responsibility; “joint custody” is closest to shared decision-making responsibility (which can exist regardless of how parenting time is split). We use the current terms on this page, but we are happy to translate an older order into today's language for you.

The one test that decides everything: the best interests of the child

Under both statutes, a court making a parenting order must consider only the best interests of the child, nothing else.^[1][4] This is not a tie-breaker or one factor among many; it is the entire inquiry. And within that inquiry, the law now sets a clear priority.

Safety comes first

Both the Divorce Act (s. 16(2)) and the CLRA (s. 24(2)) direct courts to give primary consideration to the child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being.^[1][4] In other words, when factors point in different directions, the child's safety and security carry the most weight. This elevated focus on safety, including a detailed framework for considering family violence, was one of the central purposes of the 2021 reforms.

The best-interests factors

The Divorce Act (s. 16(3)) and the CLRA (s. 24(3)) then list the factors a court must weigh. They are closely aligned and include:^[1][4]

• the child's needs, given their age and stage of development, including the need for stability;
• the nature and strength of the child's relationship with each parent, siblings, grandparents, and other important people;
• each parent's willingness to support the development of the child's relationship with the other parent;
• the history of care of the child;
• the child's views and preferences, given due weight according to age and maturity (unless they cannot be determined);
• the child's cultural, linguistic, religious and spiritual upbringing and heritage, including any Indigenous upbringing and heritage;
• any plans for the child's care;
• each person's ability and willingness to care for and meet the child's needs;
• each person's ability and willingness to communicate and cooperate, especially with one another, on matters affecting the child;
• any family violence and its impact; and
• any relevant civil or criminal proceeding, order, condition, or measure.

Two points are worth emphasizing. First, a parent's willingness to support the child's relationship with the other parent is expressly a factor, so trying to cut the other parent out can backfire badly. Second, past conduct of a parent is not considered unless it is relevant to that person's ability to parent; the Divorce Act says a court “shall not take into consideration the past conduct of any person unless the conduct is relevant to the exercise of their parenting time, decision-making responsibility or contact.”^[1] This is family law's version of the no-fault principle: who caused the breakup is generally irrelevant to parenting.

Family violence

The 2021 amendments added a detailed definition of “family violence” and require courts to weigh its impact carefully, including any pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour, whether the child was exposed to it, and any resulting risk of harm.^[1] Family violence does not automatically end a parent's time, but it is directly relevant to safety, the primary consideration, and can lead to supervised parenting time or other protective conditions. If safety is a concern in your case, tell your lawyer early.

What happened to “maximum contact”?

For decades, family lawyers spoke of the “maximum contact principle”, the old rule that a child should have as much contact with each parent as possible. That specific phrase is gone. The amended Divorce Act replaced it with what is often now called the “parenting time factor.” Section 16(6) states that, in allocating parenting time, a court “shall give effect to the principle that a child should have as much time with each spouse as is consistent with the best interests of the child.”^[1]

The change of wording matters. The old “maximum contact” language was sometimes misread as a presumption in favour of equal or shared time. The new language makes clear there is no such presumption: time with each parent is encouraged only to the extent it is consistent with the child's best interests. The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed this reframing in Barendregt v. Grebliunas, noting that the amended Act “recasts the ‘maximum contact principle’” and that it is “better referred to as the ‘parenting time factor.’”^[7] (That case was itself decided under the older framework because the lower-court decisions pre-dated the amendments, but the Court's comments on the new language are directly on point.)

So no, there is no default 50/50 rule in Ontario or under the Divorce Act. Shared parenting is common and often works well, but it is an outcome that must be justified by the child's interests, not a starting assumption.

Parenting plans: the practical blueprint

A parenting plan is the document that turns legal concepts into a workable routine. Under the Divorce Act, a parenting plan is defined as the part of a document setting out the parenting time, decision-making responsibility, or contact terms the parties agree on, and a court must include a parenting plan submitted by the parties in its order unless doing so would not be in the child's best interests.^[6] In other words, courts strongly favour arrangements that parents work out themselves.

A good parenting plan usually addresses:

• The regular schedule, where the child is on each day of a repeating cycle (for example, week-about, a 2-2-3 rotation, or a primary-residence-plus-alternate-weekends model);
• Holidays, birthdays, and school breaks, how special days and vacations are shared, often on an alternating basis;
• Decision-making, who decides what, and how disputes over major decisions are resolved;
• Communication, how the parents communicate, and how the child communicates with the other parent during parenting time;
• Exchanges and logistics, pick-up and drop-off times and locations, and transportation;
• Travel and relocation, rules for out-of-province or international travel, and notice of any proposed move; and
• Future changes, how the plan can be reviewed as the child grows.

Because a well-drafted plan prevents most future conflict, this is one of the highest-value things a family lawyer does. Many parents reach these terms through negotiation or family mediation rather than a courtroom.

How courts decide parenting cases

When parents cannot agree, either can apply to court for a parenting order, under the Divorce Act if a divorce is involved, or under the CLRA otherwise.^[5][4] A parent (or, with the court's permission, a person who stands in the place of a parent) can seek the allocation of parenting time and decision-making responsibility. Non-parents such as grandparents can apply for a contact order, generally with leave of the court.^[5]

In deciding, the court applies the best-interests test above to the specific evidence in your case, the history of care, each parent's involvement and plans, the child's needs, and any safety concerns. The court can make interim (temporary) orders while the case proceeds, and final orders after considering the evidence. It can impose terms and conditions, require that parenting time or exchanges be supervised where needed, and prohibit removing the child from a specified area without consent or a court order.^[5] Under the federal rules, a court may also direct the parties to a family dispute resolution process, subject to provincial law.^[5] Contested parenting cases in the Ontario courts commonly take many months to resolve, which is one reason a negotiated resolution, where safe and appropriate, is so often preferable.

The child's voice and the Office of the Children's Lawyer

Children do not testify in parenting disputes, but their views can still reach the court. In Ontario, that often happens through the Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL), an independent law office within the Ministry of the Attorney General that delivers legal services on behalf of children.^[8] In a parenting case, the OCL may become involved (at a court's request, subject to the OCL's discretion to accept the case) and may provide a lawyer to represent the child, a clinician (usually a social worker) to meet with the family and prepare a report for the court, or both.^[8] Importantly, the OCL does not decide what is in a child's best interests, that remains the court's job, but its involvement can give the judge valuable, child-focused evidence.

Relocation and mobility: moving with (or without) a child

Few issues are as fraught as one parent wanting to move, across the city, the province, or the country, when it affects the other parent's time. The 2021 amendments created, for the first time, a structured relocation regime. Here is how it works.

Notice is now mandatory

Under the Divorce Act, a person with parenting time or decision-making responsibility who intends to relocate must give written notice to any other person with parenting time, decision-making responsibility, or contact, at least 60 days before the expected move, in the prescribed form, including the expected date, the new address, and a proposal for how parenting time or contact could work after the move.^[9] Ontario's CLRA imposes a parallel 60-day notice requirement for relocations under provincial law.^[10] (A separate, lighter notice rule applies to an ordinary change of residence that is not a “relocation.”^[9]) A court can modify or waive the notice requirement in appropriate cases, including where there is a risk of family violence.^[9]

Objecting to a move

If the other parent objects, they must do so within 30 days of receiving the notice, using the prescribed form or by bringing a court application. If no valid objection is filed within that window and no order prohibits the move, the relocating parent may generally proceed as of the date in the notice.^[9] If there is an objection, the court decides whether to authorize the relocation.

What the court considers: and who bears the burden

On a contested relocation, the court applies the usual best-interests test plus a set of additional relocation factors set out in Divorce Act s. 16.92, including the reasons for the move, its impact on the child, how much time each parent spends with the child, whether proper notice was given, and the reasonableness of the relocating parent's proposal.^[9] Notably, the court is not allowed to ask the “would you move anyway without the child?” question, that consideration is expressly excluded.^[9]

The Divorce Act also sets out who has to prove what, and it depends on the existing parenting arrangement (s. 16.93):^[9]

• Roughly equal time: if the child spends substantially equal time in each parent's care, the relocating parent must prove the move is in the child's best interests.
• Vast majority of time with the moving parent: if the child spends the vast majority of time with the parent who wants to move, the objecting parent must prove the move is not in the child's best interests.
• Anything in between: in all other cases, both parents share the burden of showing what is in the child's best interests.

Behind these rules sits decades of case law. The Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Gordon v. Goertz established that a parent seeking to change a parenting order because of a move must first show a material change in circumstances affecting the child, after which the court conducts a fresh, individualized best-interests inquiry, with no legal presumption in favour of the parent who has primary care.^[11] More recently, in Barendregt v. Grebliunas (2022), the Court confirmed that this best-interests-focused approach continues to guide relocation cases.^[7] Relocation cases are among the most difficult and fact-specific in family law, and both the parent proposing a move and the parent opposing one should get advice before doing anything.

Enforcing a parenting order

A parenting order is legally binding, and breaching it can carry serious consequences. If one parent repeatedly withholds the child, refuses exchanges, or ignores the schedule, the other parent has options, from bringing a motion to enforce the order, to seeking make-up time, to asking the court to impose conditions or, in serious cases, vary the arrangement. Ontario courts have a range of enforcement tools where a parenting order is not being followed. If you are being denied time with your child, or you are being accused of breaching an order, do not simply take matters into your own hands, the safest course is to document what is happening and get legal advice quickly, because how you respond can affect your case.

Changing an existing parenting arrangement

Children grow and circumstances change, and a parenting order or agreement can be varied when there has been a material change in circumstances, a significant, continuing change that was not foreseen when the order was made. Under the Divorce Act, a court can vary a parenting order on proof of such a change since the order was made.^[12] Common examples include a child's changing needs as they age, a parent's relocation or change in work schedule, or new concerns about a child's safety or well-being. Not every change qualifies, a minor or temporary shift usually will not, and, as with the original order, the court's focus on a variation remains squarely on the child's best interests. If your situation has changed, apply to vary rather than simply ignoring the existing order.

Common myths about “child custody” in Ontario

“Mothers always get custody.” False. The law is gender-neutral and turns solely on the best interests of the child. There is no preference for either parent; what matters is the history of care, each parent's ability to meet the child's needs, and the child's safety and stability.^[1][4]

“There's an automatic 50/50 rule.” No. The old “maximum contact” language was replaced by the “parenting time factor,” which encourages time with each parent only to the extent it is consistent with the child's best interests, there is no presumption of equal time.^[1][7]

“Whoever the affair was with, the other parent gets the kids.” False. Parenting is decided on a no-fault basis. A court cannot consider a parent's past conduct unless it is relevant to their ability to parent.^[1]

“My child is 12, so they get to choose where they live.” Not exactly. A child's views and preferences are a factor, given due weight based on age and maturity, but there is no magic age at which a child simply decides. The court still applies the full best-interests test.^[1][4]

“If my ex won't pay child support, I can withhold parenting time.” Never do this. Parenting time and child support are legally separate. Withholding a child over unpaid support can seriously damage your own case; support is enforced through other channels.

“I can just move away with my child if I have primary care.” No. Relocation now requires at least 60 days' written notice, and a contested move must be approved by the court under a specific best-interests framework, with the burden of proof depending on the existing arrangement.^[9]

The parenting-case process, step by step

Whether your case settles or goes to court, it generally moves through the same stages. Understanding them shows you where a strong position is built.

1. Advice and immediate priorities

The first step is understanding your rights and, where there are safety concerns, addressing them right away. Early advice also helps you avoid missteps, such as unilaterally changing the schedule or moving, that can hurt you later.

2. Building the best-interests picture

We help you document the history of care, your involvement in the child's life, your proposed schedule, and your plan for the child, the evidence that speaks directly to the statutory best-interests factors.

3. Negotiation, mediation, and the parenting plan

Most parenting arrangements are resolved by agreement. A negotiated parenting plan, reached directly, through counsel, or in mediation, can be built into a separation agreement or a consent court order, giving both parents certainty and sparing the child a contested fight.

4. Court application, if needed

If agreement is not possible, either parent can apply to court. Interim orders can set a workable schedule while the case proceeds, and a judge makes a final parenting order after considering the evidence and the best-interests test. In some cases the Office of the Children's Lawyer becomes involved.

5. Review, variation, or enforcement over time

Once an order or agreement is in place, it can be reviewed or varied on a material change, or enforced if the other parent does not comply. A good arrangement anticipates change and builds in room to adjust as the child grows.

How Kazandji Law approaches parenting disputes

Parenting cases reward preparation, level-headedness, and a genuine focus on the child. We start where the law starts, with your child's best interests, and build a clear, evidence-based case around the history of care, your involvement, and a realistic plan the court can trust. Where safety is a concern, we act quickly to protect it; where it is not, we work hard to keep conflict down, because high-conflict litigation rarely serves children and often costs parents dearly.

We act for parents on every side of these disputes, those seeking shared parenting, those seeking primary care, those responding to relocation, and those enforcing or defending an existing order. Because parenting rarely stands alone in a separation, we handle it alongside divorce and separation, child support, spousal support, and property division, so the whole picture fits together.

Kazandji Law is a Toronto family and criminal law firm known for a proactive, no-nonsense approach with a genuine personal touch. We serve clients across the GTA, downtown Toronto, North York, Thornhill, Markham, Vaughan, and Oakville, and you can meet our team or review our results before you reach out. If you are early in a separation, our overview of going through a separation is a helpful next read.

Frequently asked questions

Is it still called “child custody” in Ontario?

Not in law. Since March 1, 2021, both the federal Divorce Act and Ontario's Children's Law Reform Act replaced “custody” and “access” with “decision-making responsibility” and “parenting time” (and “contact” for non-parents). Many people still use the word “custody” in conversation and in searches, and it appears in older orders, but new orders and agreements use the current terms.

What is the difference between decision-making responsibility and parenting time?

Decision-making responsibility is the authority to make major decisions about a child, health, education, culture and religion, and significant activities. Parenting time is the time a child spends in a parent's care, and the parent with the child usually makes day-to-day decisions during that time. A parent can have one without the other.

How does a court decide parenting arrangements?

By applying a single test: the best interests of the child. The court gives primary consideration to the child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being, then weighs a list of statutory factors such as the history of care, each parent's ability to meet the child's needs, the child's relationships and views, and any family violence. Nothing else is considered.

Does Ontario have a 50/50 parenting default?

No. There is no presumption of equal time. The old “maximum contact” principle was replaced by the “parenting time factor,” under which a child should have as much time with each parent as is consistent with their best interests. Shared parenting is common but must be justified by the child's interests, not assumed.

Do mothers have an advantage in getting custody?

No. The law is gender-neutral and focuses entirely on the child's best interests. There is no preference for mothers or fathers; what matters is the history of care, each parent's ability to meet the child's needs, and the child's safety and stability.

At what age can a child choose which parent to live with?

There is no set age. A child's views and preferences are one factor, given due weight based on the child's age and maturity, but the court still applies the full best-interests test. Older, more mature children's views tend to carry more weight, but a child does not simply decide.

Can a parent move away with the child?

Only with proper notice and, if contested, court approval. A parent who intends to relocate must give at least 60 days' written notice in the prescribed form. If the other parent objects within 30 days, the court decides whether the move is in the child's best interests, applying specific relocation factors, with the burden of proof depending on the existing parenting arrangement.

What is the Office of the Children's Lawyer?

The Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) is an independent law office within Ontario's Ministry of the Attorney General that delivers legal services on behalf of children. In a parenting case it may, at a court's request and in its discretion, provide a lawyer to represent the child, a clinician to prepare a report for the court, or both. The OCL does not decide the child's best interests; the court does.

Can grandparents get time with a child?

Yes, in appropriate cases. A non-parent such as a grandparent can apply for a contact order, generally with the court's permission. As with all parenting matters, the court decides based on the best interests of the child, including whether contact could otherwise occur during a parent's time.

My ex won't pay child support: can I stop parenting time?

No. Parenting time and child support are legally separate issues. Withholding a child because support is unpaid can seriously harm your own parenting case. Unpaid support is enforced through other means, including Ontario's support enforcement system.

Can a parenting order be changed later?

Yes. A parenting order or agreement can be varied when there has been a material change in circumstances, a significant, continuing change not foreseen when the order was made, such as a child's changing needs, a relocation, or new safety concerns. The court again focuses on the child's best interests. You should apply to vary rather than ignore the existing order.

Do we have to go to court to sort out parenting?

No. Most parenting arrangements are resolved by agreement, often through negotiation or mediation, and set out in a parenting plan that becomes part of a separation agreement or consent order. Courts strongly favour arrangements parents work out themselves and must include an agreed parenting plan unless it is not in the child's best interests. Court is available when agreement is not possible.

How much does a child custody lawyer cost?

Fees depend on the complexity of the case and whether it resolves by agreement or proceeds to court. Kazandji Law offers a free initial consultation and will give you a clear picture of the process and likely cost before you decide anything.

Sources & legal references

1. Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.), s. 16. Best interests of the child (only consideration, s. 16(1); primary consideration = child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being, s. 16(2); factors, s. 16(3); family violence factors, s. 16(4); past conduct, s. 16(5); parenting time consistent with best interests, s. 16(6)): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/d-3.4/section-16.html.
2. Divorce Act, s. 2(1) definitions of “parenting time,” “decision-making responsibility,” “contact order” and related terms (as amended, in force March 1, 2021): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/d-3.4/page-1.html.
3. Children's Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 18 (definitions of “decision-making responsibility,” “parenting time,” “contact”; and s. 18(5) to (6) bridging references from “custody”/“access”), as amended by the Moving Ontario Family Law Forward Act, 2020, S.O. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1 (in force March 1, 2021): canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-c12/latest/rso-1990-c-c12.html.
4. Children's Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 24. Best interests of the child (only consideration, s. 24(1); primary consideration = safety, security and well-being, s. 24(2); factors, s. 24(3)): canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-c12/latest/rso-1990-c-c12.html.
5. Divorce Act, ss. 16.1 to 16.5. Parenting orders (s. 16.1), parenting time by schedule and day-to-day decisions (s. 16.2), allocation of decision-making responsibility (s. 16.3), entitlement to information (s. 16.4), and contact orders (s. 16.5): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/d-3.4/page-4.html. Ontario equivalent: Children's Law Reform Act, s. 28 (powers of the court to make parenting/contact orders).
6. Divorce Act, s. 16.6. Parenting plan (court shall include a parenting plan submitted by the parties unless not in the child's best interests; definition of “parenting plan”): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/d-3.4/page-4.html.
7. Barendregt v. Grebliunas, 2022 SCC 22 (recasting the “maximum contact principle” as the “parenting time factor” under s. 16(6); relocation and the Gordon v. Goertz framework; note the appeal was decided under the pre-2021 framework as the lower-court decisions pre-dated the amendments): canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2022/2022scc22/2022scc22.html.
8. Office of the Children's Lawyer, Ministry of the Attorney General (Ontario), independent law office representing children; in parenting cases may provide a lawyer for the child, a clinical investigator/report, or both: ontario.ca/page/office-childrens-lawyer.
9. Divorce Act, ss. 16.9 to 16.96. Relocation: 60-day notice (s. 16.9); when relocation is authorized and 30-day objection (s. 16.91); additional best-interests factors (s. 16.92); burden of proof by parenting arrangement (s. 16.93); interim-order exception (s. 16.94): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/d-3.4/page-4.html.
10. Children's Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, ss. 39.1 to 39.4, change of residence and relocation (60-day notice, s. 39.3; best-interests factors and three-tier burden of proof, s. 39.4), as enacted by S.O. 2020, c. 25, Sched. 1: canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-c12/latest/rso-1990-c-c12.html.
11. Gordon v. Goertz, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27, 1996 CanLII 191 (SCC) (leading relocation/mobility case; material change threshold, then a fresh best-interests inquiry with no presumption in favour of the parent with primary care): canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1996/1996canlii191/1996canlii191.html.
12. Divorce Act, s. 17 (variation of parenting and other orders on a change in circumstances): laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/d-3.4/section-17.html.

Disclaimer: This page provides general legal information about decision-making responsibility and parenting time (formerly “child custody and access”) in Ontario and is not legal advice. The law is applied to the specific facts of each case, and outcomes vary. For advice about your situation, contact a lawyer. Contacting Kazandji Law does not create a solicitor-client relationship until a retainer is signed.