I seem to recall a lot of previous threads dealing with issues such as these. Interesting decision made by the judge:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../National/home
Quote:
A Toronto man is on the hook to pay child support, notwithstanding a DNA test that proved he is not the biological father of his ex-wife's twins, an Ontario Superior Court judge has ruled.
Madam Justice Katherine van Rensburg ordered Pasqualino Cornelio to continue paying child support to the 16-year-old twins – regardless of whether he was bamboozled by a philandering wife.
“While the failure of Anciolina Cornelio to disclose to her husband the fact that she had an extramarital affair – and that the twins might not be his biological children – may have been a moral wrong against Mr. Cornelio, it is a wrong that does not afford him a legal remedy to recover child support he has already paid, and that does not permit him to stop paying child support,” Judge van Rensburg said.
|
Seems to me that the gender of the judge might have something to do with the decision on something that seems grossly unfair.
New definition of father in the eyes of the courts:
Quote:
She pointed to an expansive definition of “parent” under the Family Law Act under which Mr. Cornelio can be seen as “a person who has demonstrated a settled intention to treat a child as a child of his or her family.”
|