On a family law motion concerning retroactive child support, ongoing support, and s.7 post-secondary expenses for two children, the court held that one child ceased to be a child of the marriage when he finished school and began full-time employment, barring retroactive and s.7 claims for him.
For the second child, the court found he resided with the father for a period, terminated support for that interval, continued support until full-time employment commenced, and limited retroactive support to the three years preceding the mother's motion.
The court rejected a claim of blameworthy conduct sufficient to justify reaching back to 2000.
It further held that one-third of the support payor's RSP withdrawals should be included in income for child support purposes and ordered a proportionate contribution to post-secondary expenses.