Guy Martel

The applicant sought to terminate or reduce spousal support obligations, effective December 9, 2021, and a reimbursement of past support, or alternatively, a reduction and termination date.

The respondent argued no material change occurred and sought an increase or maintenance of current support.

The court found a material change in circumstances due to the applicant's retirement and health issues, but determined that spousal support should not terminate due to the respondent's disability and ongoing need.

The court ordered a lump sum payment of $125,000 from the applicant to the respondent for all past and future spousal support, emphasizing finality and financial clarity, and rejecting the respondent's higher lump sum request and the applicant's lower one.

The trial addressed two main issues: the respondent's claim for legal costs and disbursements incurred between 2012 and 2018, and the proper division of the parties' respective pensions.

The court dismissed the respondent's claim for costs due to credibility issues, lack of evidence, and inappropriate conduct, including dishonesty.

Regarding pensions, the court ordered the division of both parties' pensions based on gross values, rejecting the respondent's request to include pre-marital accruals for the applicant's pension and setting interest accumulation from March 1, 2017, due to shared responsibility for delays, but primarily attributing delay to the respondent's dishonesty.

The respondent, Ross McHardy, brought a motion to terminate his spousal support obligation to the applicant, Cheryl McHardy, citing his retirement, age (over 70), and significant health issues after 16 years of payments following a 29.5-year cohabitation.

The applicant acknowledged the material change but sought continued reduced support.

The court found that Mr. McHardy's retirement constituted a material change in circumstances.

Considering the parties' comparable financial circumstances, including their incomes and roughly similar net worth, and Mr. McHardy's age and health, the court terminated the spousal support obligation effective January 1, 2021, concluding that Ms. McHardy had not demonstrated a need for continued support and that compensation had been achieved.

The plaintiff, Drew Casterton, sued the defendant, Gordon MacIsaac, for injuries sustained during a recreational hockey game collision.

The court found MacIsaac liable for intentionally or recklessly causing a blindside hit to Casterton's face, which was deemed outside the bounds of fair play.

The defence of contributory negligence, based on Casterton's choice of a half-visor and alleged cannabis impairment, was rejected.

Casterton was awarded general damages, past income loss, and future income loss, totaling $702,551, but punitive damages were not granted.