Carol J. Smith

The appellant appealed a decision of the Social Benefits Tribunal that upheld the refusal to grant him financial assistance for shelter costs under the Ontario Works Act.

The appellant argued that requiring proof of incurred shelter costs contradicted the Act's definition of income assistance.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no error of law, as section 7 of the Act explicitly states that eligibility conditions are set by regulation, and the regulation limits shelter assistance to actual costs payable.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of his motion to change child and spousal support orders.

The motion judge dismissed the motion under Rule 1(8)(b) of the Family Law Rules due to the appellant's failure to comply with prior support and costs orders, combined with an absence of good faith effort to pay.

The motion judge also rejected the appellant's fraud claim as statute-barred.

The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal, finding that the assignee (City of Toronto) maintained party status to the extent of its financial interests, that the motion judge properly exercised her discretion to dismiss based on non-compliance, and that the fraud allegation was both irrelevant and statute-barred.

The applicant father sought to confirm a provisional variation order from British Columbia that drastically reduced his child and spousal support obligations and arrears.

The respondent mother and the City of Toronto opposed the confirmation, providing evidence that the applicant had misrepresented his income, employment capabilities, and notice of the original Ontario proceedings to the British Columbia court.

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused to confirm the provisional order, finding the applicant had not been honest, and ordered the original support order to continue in effect with costs awarded to the respondent and the City.

The respondent father brought a motion to change a child support order dated January 4, 2006, seeking to rescind all arrears.

The applicant mother did not respond and was noted in default.

The father claimed he had suffered a motor vehicle accident on December 21, 2011, resulting in injuries and depression that prevented him from working.

The court found that while the father's present ability to work had been compromised, he failed to establish a permanent future inability to pay.

The court terminated ongoing support obligations but rescinded only the arrears owing to the mother.

The arrears owing to the City of Toronto (assignee) were fixed at $31,000, with the father ordered to repay at $150 per month commencing March 1, 2015.

A default order was issued providing for jail time for non-compliance.