BELDEN & LAMKEY

In the matter of *Belden & Lamkey*, heard by Judge Harland, the dispute concerned an application to vary final consent orders made in November 2018. These orders contained specific conditions relating to the mother's drug use. The father sought to vary these orders, arguing that his own alcohol use constituted a change of circumstance warranting such variation.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the father's alcohol consumption amounted to a material change in circumstances sufficient to justify setting aside or varying the existing final consent orders, particularly in light of the conditions imposed on the mother concerning her drug use. The court was required to consider the principles governing the variation of final consent orders in family law proceedings.

Judge Harland's reasoning focused on the nature of the existing orders and the evidence presented regarding the father's alcohol use. The court applied the principles established in cases such as *Rice* and *Asplund*, which generally require a significant and unforeseen change in circumstances to justify disturbing final consent orders. The court found that the father's alcohol use, as presented, did not meet the threshold for a material change in circumstances that would warrant varying the final consent orders. Consequently, the application to vary the orders was dismissed.