In a family law appeal involving an exceptionally high-income payor, the court held that the presumptive Table amount under s. 4 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines could be displaced where clear and compelling evidence showed it was inappropriate.
The court found the child support award required a fresh hearing because the trial judge had been bound by pre-Francis authority and had made insufficient findings on the child's means, needs, and circumstances.
The cross-appeal on spousal support was also allowed because the trial judge failed to consider all objectives in s. 15.2(6) of the Divorce Act.
The court dismissed the custody and wedding gift issues, but held that the wealthy payor should ordinarily bear the costs of litigating child support where the custodial parent is forced to defend the presumptive Table amount.
