Your ‘Temporary’ Parenting Schedule Isn’t Temporary: What Angelillo v. Mughal Means for Moving With Your Child

Written by Leah M. Good, Partner in Fredericton

When parents separate, it’s common to put a temporary parenting schedule in place “just for now” while everyone figures out what comes next. But a recent decision from the Ontario Court of Appeal—Angelillo v. Mughal, 2025 ONCA 769—shows just how important those early, interim arrangements really are.

In fact, the Court made it clear that the temporary schedule you agree to today may directly affect whether a future relocation request succeeds or fails.

Here’s what parents need to know.

What Happened in Angelillo v. Mughal?

The parents in this case had separated and were following an interim parenting order, which provided the father with primary care of the child. The mother originally had supervised parenting time, which expanded to 3-4 days a week, and one overnight by the time of the trial.

Later, the father sought to relocate with the child to Montreal from Ontario. At trial, the judge treated the case as if it were only a straightforward “best interests” analysis of the child under the Divorce Act. The trial judge incorrectly held both parties to an equal burden of proof to establish whether relocation would serve the child’s best interests.

The Court of Appeal said this was wrong.

Instead, it held that the trial judge should have started with the presumption that the relocation with their father would be in the child’s best interest (as he had the substantial parenting time with the child) and the mother bore the burden to convince the Court otherwise.  This aspect of the matter was sent back to King’s Bench, family division, for a new consideration.

Depending on how much time a child spends in the care of each parent, the law decides which parent has to prove whether the move is in the child’s best interests. That “burden of proof” can be a major factor in the outcome.

Why Temporary Schedules Have a Big Impact

Under the Divorce Act, and similar provincial legislation for those not under the Divorce Act, the burden of proof in a relocation case depends on whether there is already a parenting order or agreed-upon arrangement in place.

If there is an order or agreement that sees a child spending the “vast majority” of their time in the care of one parent, and that parent wishes to relocate, the opposing parent will bear the burden of proving why the relocation is not in the child’s best interest.

If the parties have an order or agreement that sees the child spend substantially equal time between parents, than the party seeking to relocate the child has the burden of proving that the relocation would be in the best interest of the child.

These shifting presumptions are built into the law, and the Court must apply them. They become the starting point for the entire best-interests analysis. Put simply: if you are the parent who wants to relocate, it is far better to start with a presumption that the move is in the child’s best interests than to fight against an interim schedule that puts the burden of proof on you. Once a temporary schedule is in place, you may be forced to overcome a legal presumption that favours keeping the child where they are.

In Angelillo, because the parents had been following an interim order that provided the relocating father with the majority of parenting time, that meant that the mother, who opposed the relocation, had the burden to prove the child’s relocation with the father was not in the child’s best interests.

In other words: an interim parenting time schedule, either court ordered or on agreement can have powerful effects on a relocation request because it determines who has to the heavy lifting in court.

What This Means for Parents

1. Temporary doesn’t always mean temporary

Even if you think a schedule is just a short-term fix, courts look at the child’s actual experience. If the child has settled into a routine, that routine matters.

2. Early decisions shape later outcomes

The schedule you are using now can determine what legal test applies later—and who has to meet a tougher burden of proof.

3. If relocation might be in your future, be cautious

Agreeing to an interim schedule that does not align with your long-term plans may make a future move harder to justify.

4. If you want stability to be recognized, establish it early

For parents opposing relocation, a consistent interim schedule can help demonstrate that the child has a strong, established relationship with both parents.

What You Should Do if You’re in This Situation

• Get agreements in writing, even interim ones—clarity helps.
• Be mindful before agreeing to a schedule, especially if relocation is on the horizon.
• Document how the schedule is working, including pickups, overnights, and involvement in school or activities.
• Get legal advice early, because early decisions can have long-lasting consequences.

Bottom Line

• The message from Angelillo v. Mughal is clear:
  Interim parenting arrangements matter—sometimes more than parents expect.
• They can shape the legal framework of a relocation case and influence whether a move is ultimately approved.
• If you’re creating a temporary schedule, or thinking about relocating, make sure you understand how your decisions today may affect your options tomorrow.