The applicant sought to compel the respondent to comply with a separation agreement regarding post-secondary expenses for their child and to increase monthly child support by imputing a higher income to the respondent.
The respondent cross-moved to reduce child support and adjust Section 7 expenses.
The court found the respondent was not intentionally under-employed despite reducing extra work due to new family responsibilities, thus declining to impute a higher income.
The court interpreted the separation agreement to exclude living expenses from Section 7 post-secondary costs, reducing the total amount payable by both parents.
The child's contribution to education was not deducted from the parents' share.
