The moving party sought to vary a prior spousal support order under s. 17 of the Divorce Act, arguing that newly proven lower income in 2009 and 2010 constituted a material change in circumstances.
The court held that the earlier order had imputed income of $50,000 based on evidence of the payor’s earning capacity, work history, and failure to provide full financial disclosure.
The evidence presented on the motion did not demonstrate a material change since the original order, particularly where the payor later earned more than the imputed income and failed to provide persuasive medical evidence of incapacity to work.
The court reaffirmed that variation proceedings cannot be used to relitigate the correctness of the original order absent a qualifying change in circumstances.
