Court of Appeal for Ontario

Date: 2023-12-12 Docket: C70159

Fairburn A.C.J.O., van Rensburg and Zarnett JJ.A.

BETWEEN

K.K. Applicant (Appellant)

and

M.M. Respondent (Respondent)

Counsel: Gabrielle Pop-Lazic, for the appellant Aida Pasha, for the respondent

Heard and released orally: December 5, 2023

On appeal from the orders of Justice Cynthia Petersen of the Superior Court of Justice, dated June 1, 2021, November 15, 2021 and February 23, 2022.

Reasons for Decision

[1] The parties were married in India on March 10, 2003. They later moved to Canada. They have two children and separated on November 12, 2012. Since then, they have been involved in an acrimonious and highly litigious relationship.

[2] This is an appeal from the trial judge’s decision, specifically as it relates to spousal support. The spousal support was set at the high end of the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines for an indefinite period of time, subject to review on or after December 1, 2027. The appellant claims that this constituted an error, but acknowledges that, at its core, the objection to the trial judge’s reasoning really comes down to the weighing of the relevant factors.

[3] The standard of review for family support decisions is significant deference. An appellate court should only intervene where there is a material error, a serious misapprehension of the evidence, or an error in law. This court is not entitled to overturn a support order simply because it would have made a different decision or balanced the factors differently: Hickey v. Hickey, , [1999] 2 S.C.R. 518, at para. 12. This is what we are being asked to do by the appellant. We have been pointed to no reversible legal error and no overriding palpable factual error with respect to the reasoning or the result reached by the trial judge.

[4] The appeal is dismissed. Costs will be paid by the appellant to the respondent in the amount of $20,000, all-inclusive.

“Fairburn A.C.J.O.”

“K. van Rensburg J.A.”

“B. Zarnett J.A.”