Joyce Faria

This decision arises from a Binding Judicial Dispute Resolution (BJDR) hearing in a family law matter, resolving outstanding issues between separated spouses.

The court adjudicated disputes concerning the treatment of cell phone payments as Section 7 expenses, the inclusion of a personal debt (Fairstone) in the applicant's net family property, the allocation of post-secondary education expenses for the eldest child, the payment schedule for retroactive child support, and claims for occupation rent and contributions to the matrimonial home.

The court found cell phones to be Section 7 expenses, disallowed the Fairstone debt due to insufficient evidence, ordered retroactive child support as a lump sum from trust funds, and awarded occupation rent to the respondent while crediting the applicant for her contributions to the matrimonial home.

Final orders were made regarding child support, spousal support, equalization, and parenting arrangements.

The applicant moved for summary judgment to enforce an accepted offer to settle regarding the jointly-owned matrimonial home.

The respondent argued the applicant was only entitled to equity as of the date of separation and sought to extend the expired deadline to buy out the applicant's interest.

The court found a binding agreement existed, the valuation date was the date of buyout or sale, and the respondent was responsible for the delay that caused the buyout deadline to expire.

The court ordered the home to be listed for sale immediately, with the applicant entitled to his share of the equity as of the date of sale.

The respondent father brought a motion to change seeking rescission of child support arrears, termination of child support, and credit for alleged overpayment of daycare expenses after the child turned 12.

The court held that the father failed to meet the legal criteria for retroactive rescission of arrears, emphasizing delay, lack of disclosure, and conduct inconsistent with relief.

The court imputed income after adjusting business deductions and fixed income at $30,000 for support purposes.

Child support was reduced prospectively to guideline support effective December 1, 2012, daycare expenses were terminated from that date, and orthodontic expenses were ordered as a shared s.7 expense.

The court held that a child participating in an international exchange remained a “child of the marriage” under the Divorce Act and declined to terminate support during the exchange period.