Lindsay Gardner Mills

The applicant, Galo Angulo, brought a motion to change a 2004 final order requiring him to pay spousal support, seeking termination of support and life insurance obligations due to his retirement.

The respondent, Shirley Angulo, brought a cross-motion seeking extensive financial disclosure, retroactive spousal support arrears, and an increase in ongoing spousal support, alleging Galo retired to evade payments.

The court found Galo's retirement at age 68, with outdated skills and health issues, constituted a reasonable material change in circumstances.

The court denied Shirley's requests for disclosure and retroactive arrears, finding her claims speculative and her delay in seeking arrears unconvincing.

The court emphasized the parties' separation agreement clause requiring them to rely on their capital for support in retirement.

Spousal support and the life insurance obligation were terminated effective April 30, 2019.

The appellant father appealed a decision of the Ontario Court of Justice dismissing his motion to vary a separation agreement governing child support obligations and quantifying arrears for special expenses.

The father argued that a material change in circumstances existed due to a decline in his income and an increase in the mother’s means, and that the trial judge erred by failing to adjust his support obligations accordingly.

Applying the principles from Willick v. Willick and the deferential appellate standard described in Housen v. Nikolaisen and Hickey v. Hickey, the court held that the alleged financial deterioration was foreseeable and largely the result of the father’s own choices regarding employment and business ventures.

Because the circumstances relied upon were apparent at the time the agreement was executed and did not constitute a qualifying material change, the refusal to vary the agreement was upheld.

The respondent mother’s cross‑appeal seeking trial costs was also dismissed, as the costs determination fell within the trial judge’s discretion.