Harold Albrecht

The respondent sought leave to amend her Answer to claim retroactive and ongoing child support for her adult daughter from a previous relationship.

The applicant opposed the motion, arguing the claim was legally untenable because the daughter was no longer a 'child of the marriage' under the Divorce Act.

The court granted the motion, finding that the proposed amendment pleaded facts that could support a finding that the daughter remained a child of the marriage at the material time, and that recent Supreme Court jurisprudence has called into question the strict jurisdictional bar on retroactive support for adult children.

The payor father brought a motion to change a 2004 order, seeking to terminate his spousal and child support obligations after voluntarily leaving his employment to start his own business.

The court treated the matter as a trial at first instance.

Finding that the payor was intentionally under-employed, the court imputed his income at $80,000 based on his previous earnings.

The court ordered the payor to continue paying child support for the remaining eligible child and ongoing spousal support of $750 monthly, while dismissing historical claims for section 7 expenses.