What is the test for making a compelling argument in a custody and access case?

[60] The court does not find this submission to be compelling. It is contrary to the purposes of costs orders. See: Winiarz v. Anderson, supra, par. 36. It is a submission that courts often hear in custody and access disputes (and particularly in domestic violence cases). Essentially what a parent is saying in making this submission is that if you order costs against me then I am going to be very unhappy and this could lead to me engaging in conflict with the other parent – the children might be emotionally harmed. So, a parent who might have acted unreasonably to warrant a costs order uses the threat of future unreasonable behaviour as a rationale to reduce their costs. That is not the basis to reduce a costs award.