What is the test for making a specified access order in a custody dispute?

[49] In M.A.W. v. J.A.W., 2013 ONCJ 34, this court dealt with a dispute similar to this case. In M.A.W., I found that there was a genuine lis with respect to the issue of custody, but no genuine lis with respect to the issues of access and the non-removal of the child from Canada. I granted custody of the child to the mother and she was permitted to take the child with her to Jamaica once she was deported. I found that the parties cooperated very well with respect to access and declined to make a specified access order – instead granting the father reasonable and generous access. I wrote the following at paragraph 28: The evidence indicates that a specified access order is not required. It is highly unlikely that the issue would have even been before the court, if not for the possible deportation of the mother. The reality is that the mother may be removed shortly from Canada, and the court should not make a specified access order just to frustrate the deportation process, when the terms of access are not in dispute (see my comments in Canabate v. Ayala [2010] ONCJ 54, paragraphs 58-60 and Ffrench v. Williams, [2011] ONCJ 406), paragraphs 119-123. 5.2 Analysis