3 total
Interim spousal support granted at SSAG high end based on pre-separation income.
The respondent husband brought a motion for interim spousal support following the breakdown of a seven-year cohabitation and four-year marriage.
The applicant wife, a physician who had recently completed a medical fellowship and commenced a substantially higher-paying position, opposed the motion, disputing the respondent's compensatory and non-compensatory claims and arguing that no income increase should be shared.
The court found a prima facie entitlement to spousal support on both compensatory and non-compensatory grounds, but declined to base quantum on the applicant's post-separation income increase due to the conflicting evidence regarding the respondent's contributions.
The court fixed the applicant's income at $85,490 for support purposes based on a five-year average, declined to impute income to the respondent, and ordered interim spousal support at the high end of the SSAG range at $2,254 per month.
The court awarded the mother $5,500 in costs following a temporary parenting and child support motion.
This decision addresses the awarding of costs following temporary parenting and child support motions involving a 13-year-old child.
The court granted the mother temporary decision-making responsibility for major educational and health issues and ordered the father to pay temporary child support.
The mother made a severable offer to settle that was more favourable to the father than the court's order, triggering costs consequences under subrule 18(14) of the Family Law Rules.
The court analyzed the reasonableness and proportionality of costs, the parties' conduct, and the father's ability to pay, ultimately ordering the father to pay $5,500 in costs with a payment plan.
The court granted the mother sole decision-making responsibility for the child's vaccinations and ordered the father to pay child support.
The applicant and respondent sought temporary decision-making responsibility orders for their child, primarily concerning vaccination.
The applicant also sought temporary child support.
The court disregarded the joint decision-making terms of their separation agreement, finding them no longer in the child's best interests due to fundamental disagreements on health care.
The court granted the applicant sole decision-making responsibility for health and educational issues, including vaccinations, and ordered the respondent to pay child support of $600 per month, consistent with the original agreement and guidelines.
The court declined to prohibit the father from discussing vaccines with the child but referred the matter to the Office of the Children's Lawyer.
