The parties divorced after a 20-year marriage.
The appellant husband sought to discontinue his spousal support payments, arguing he was unemployed and the respondent wife had a duty to become self-sufficient.
The trial judge and Court of Appeal dismissed his application.
The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed, holding that while the Divorce Act prohibits considering spousal misconduct itself in support orders, the emotional consequences of such misconduct that impair a spouse's ability to achieve self-sufficiency are relevant.
The Court also confirmed that self-sufficiency is an objective, not a strict duty, and that a payor's after-acquired capital assets can be considered in determining their ability to pay.
