The applicant mother and respondent father separated after a 17-year marriage.
The primary issues at trial were decision-making responsibility for their 15-year-old daughter, valuation of the respondent's road construction business, imputation of income, and claims for retroactive and ongoing child and spousal support.
The court awarded sole decision-making responsibility to the applicant, finding the respondent's actions regarding the children to be manipulative and inconsistent.
On the financial issues, the court preferred the applicant's expert business and income valuations, finding the respondent lacked credibility, failed to provide fulsome financial disclosure, and intentionally underreported his income.
The court valued the business at $466,000 and imputed the respondent's income at $201,607.70.
The respondent was ordered to pay an equalization payment of $241,675.65, retroactive child support of $51,374.64, and section 7 arrears of $7,054.50.
Given the respondent's history of non-compliance and unilateral support reductions, the court awarded the applicant a lump sum spousal support payment of $227,702.
