CITATION: Roscoe v. Ontario (Family Responsibility Office), 2007 ONCA 253
DATE: 20070410
DOCKET: C44369

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

PETER ROSCOE (Appellant (Moving Party)) and OFFICE OF FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY (Respondent)

BEFORE:

GOUDGE, LANG AND ROULEAU JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

Peter Roscoe (in person appellant)

Ron Hurren

for the respondent

HEARD & RELEASED ORALLY:

April 3, 2007

On appeal from the judgment of Justice Michel Z. Charbonneau of the Superior Court of Justice September 19, 2005.

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The appellant says that the application judge erred in declining to deal with the merits of his two constitutional arguments. We disagree. It is not open to the appellant in these proceedings to argue that the law that was applied to strike his pleadings in the prior support proceedings is unconstitutional, or that the support order itself is unconstitutional. The application judge was required to take the support order before him as sound, since it had previously been unsuccessfully appealed by the appellant.

[2] The appellant also says that the application judge erred in finding that he had not shown an inability to pay. In our view, the record before the application judge sustains his conclusion on the evidence.

[3] The appeal must be dismissed.

[4] Costs to the respondent fixed at $2,000.00.

"S.T. Goudge J.A."

"S.E. Lang J.A."

"Paul Rouleau J.A."