Daman Aujla

Following a prior trial decision determining support obligations, the court invited the parties to make limited submissions addressing potential calculation errors in the support calculations.

The applicant instead filed an affidavit containing new documentation and income calculations that had not been part of the trial record.

The court held that the submissions process was restricted to identifying mathematical errors and did not permit the introduction of new evidence.

As the applicant had previously been given opportunities to present documentation during the trial, the court refused to consider the new materials.

The original support calculations therefore remained unchanged.

Following divorce, the parties litigated corollary relief including custody, access, child support, spousal support, and equalization.

The court found the parties had significant credibility issues and incomplete financial disclosure.

Sole custody of the children was granted to the respondent, but the applicant was granted a graduated return to unsupervised access based on evidence from supervised access reports and the principle of maximizing contact under the Divorce Act.

Income was imputed to the applicant based on business bank deposits due to inadequate disclosure, resulting in retroactive and ongoing child support.

Claims for spousal support and equalization were largely denied, with only limited transitional spousal support recognized.