Kimberlea Marie Margaret Cartwright

This is a costs endorsement following a successful motion by the respondent to reduce spousal support.

The respondent sought full recovery costs, citing success and the applicant's alleged unreasonable behaviour.

The applicant resisted, claiming good faith negotiation attempts were hindered by the respondent.

The court found the respondent was the successful party on the underlying motion, entitling him to costs under Family Law Rule 24(1).

However, the respondent's offers to settle, which included significant and non-severable costs demands, were deemed to have impeded settlement.

Consequently, the court reduced the quantum of costs awarded to the respondent from an estimated partial recovery of $6,000 to $4,000.

The respondent (payor) brought a motion for a temporary reduction in spousal support due to a material change in circumstances, specifically a significant reduction in income from $102,000 to $86,000 per year following the elimination of overtime and on-call duties at Ontario Hydro.

The applicant (recipient) opposed, arguing the change was not material or was foreseeable.

The court applied a four-part test for interim variations (prima facie case, hardship, urgency, clean hands) and found that the respondent had established a strong prima facie case for a material change, demonstrated hardship, acted with urgency, and had clean hands.

The motion was granted, and spousal support was temporarily reduced from $2,275 to $1,775 per month, retroactive to November 1, 2019.