2 total
The Court of Appeal upheld a spousal support award that included a substantial interest-free mortgage benefit.
The appellant, Elaine Nairne, appealed a trial judge's order regarding spousal support quantum and duration, arguing that the trial judge failed to adequately consider the significant income disparity and differing marital contributions.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no reversible error in the trial judge's holistic assessment of the spousal support award, which included a substantial interest-free mortgage benefit to the appellant on the matrimonial home.
The court affirmed the principle of significant deference to trial judges in spousal support decisions, while noting that the trial judge's approach to assessing compensatory and needs-based entitlement was arguably narrow.
A minor modification was made to the order regarding the specific employer reference for the respondent's retirement.
Father's access continued with COVID-19 restrictions; mother ordered to cease surreptitious tracking of father.
The applicant mother brought an urgent motion to suspend the respondent father's parenting time, alleging he breached COVID-19 protocols by taking the children hiking, to supermarkets, and to his parents' cottage.
The father brought a cross-motion to continue his access and prohibit the mother from surveilling him, after discovering she had placed a tracking device in the children's backpack.
The court declined to suspend the father's access, finding no child protection concerns, but imposed specific COVID-19 safety restrictions.
The court also prohibited the mother from tracking the father and ordered her to produce all surveillance records, utilizing its jurisdiction under the Children's Law Reform Act and the Family Law Rules to manage the high-conflict situation.
