James A. Hunter

The applicant payor brought a motion to change spousal support following his retirement, seeking to terminate support.

The respondent opposed the motion, citing extreme hardship.

The court found that the motion could not proceed on the untested affidavit materials, as there were significant factual and credibility disputes, and neither party had properly advanced their case.

The motion was adjourned to allow for cross-examinations and the preparation of an agreed statement of facts.

This is a costs endorsement following a two-day trial on child support obligations.

The applicant (mother) sought costs of $25,305 following a successful trial where she obtained child support of $2,726 per month, arrears of $56,227, and spousal support of $550 per month.

The respondent (father) argued the costs claim was excessive.

The court found the mother was the successful party and entitled to costs.

The mother had made a settlement offer on December 15, 2016, which was more favourable to her than the final order, triggering the presumptive costs consequences under subrule 18(14) of the Family Law Rules.

The court awarded costs of $15,000 inclusive of fees, disbursements, and HST, finding this amount fair and reasonable despite the mother's claim being higher, after considering the complexity of the issues, the reasonableness of the parties' behaviour, the lawyer's rates, and the time spent on the case.

Trial decision on child and spousal support.

The applicant mother sought child support retroactive to January 1, 2013, based on the respondent father's line 150 income, and indefinite spousal support of $3,961 monthly.

The respondent father proposed $1,000 monthly child support starting January 1, 2017, with 50% of section 7 expenses, and sought dismissal of the spousal support claim.

The court determined the father's income at $196,827 for 2016, rejected his claim that taxable allowances for living and working in Fort McMurray should be deducted, and found he did not meet the threshold for undue hardship under section 10 of the Child Support Guidelines.

The court ordered ongoing child support of $2,726 monthly, spousal support of $550 monthly (indefinite but subject to review after 5 years), retroactive child support from March 1, 2014, and fixed arrears at $56,227.37.

The court rejected the mother's claim for section 7 expenses for tutoring and piano lessons as extraordinary, but ordered the father to maintain health coverage and pay 80% of orthodontic expenses not covered by insurance.

Following the breakdown of a long-term unmarried cohabitation, the respondent sought ongoing and retroactive non‑compensatory spousal support alleging disability due to depression, ADD, and dyslexia.

The court assessed competing psychiatric evidence regarding the respondent’s employability.

Accepting the opinion of a court‑ordered psychiatric assessor over the treating psychiatrist, the court found the respondent suffered from chronic low‑grade depression but was capable of employment and self‑sufficiency if motivated.

The court held that dependency arose only in the final years of the relationship and was inconsistent with the parties’ prior financial independence.

Ongoing support was therefore time‑limited and ordered to terminate after a transition period, with limited retroactive support awarded.