What is the test for a motion to vary access to a child by a third party?

Finally, counsel for the father referred to Belisle v. Poole, [1994] O.J. No. 364, another decision of the Ontario Court of Justice. There, the mother had already agreed to change some of the access provisions in a divorce judgment, at the request of the father, but when the father subsequently sought to vary those access provisions, the mother opposed. She contended that there had been no material change in circumstances. The court commented at para 4 of the report: Notwithstanding her consent to the variations referred to, the [mother] argues that there has been no “change in the condition, means, needs or other circumstances” which warrants the further variation which is being sought. In my view, this is a contradiction. The appropriateness of making certain amendments was recognized by [the mother] and this was presumably on the basis of a material change of circumstances. It is not reasonable that the appropriate threshold has been met in order to permit some variation but not in relation to the more extensive relief which is been sought by [the father].