Court of Appeal for Ontario

Citation: Beitel v. Beitel, 2008 ONCA 12

Date: 20080110

Docket: C45804

MACPHERSON, ARMSTRONG and EPSTEIN JJ.A.

BETWEEN:

MARIE RAYMONDE MICHELINE BEITEL

Applicant/Respondent

and

ALLAN BEITEL

Respondent/Appellant

Allan Beitel appearing in person

Micheline Godbout (formerly Beitel) appearing in person

Heard: January 9, 2008

On appeal from the order of Justice Francine E. Van Melle of the Superior Court of Justice dated July 11, 2006.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] The appellant appeals several components of the order of Van Melle J. dated 11 July 2006 in a difficult family law matter.

[2] In oral argument, the appellant focussed entirely on the retroactive child support component of the trial judge’s order. In our view, the trial judge’s conclusion that there was an entitlement to child support at the relevant time was correct. In addition, her decision to impute income to the appellant and the amount she chose to impute are, in our view, supportable.

[3] The respondent, quite fairly, concedes that there is a small error in the trial judge’s quantification of retroactive support. With respect to the year 2003, the trial judge said that the appellant owed “ten months for a total of $18,860.00.” The respondent says that the appellant in fact paid support for three of those months. Accordingly, the retroactive support amount should be reduced by $5658. In all other respects, the support order is affirmed.

[4] For the sake of completeness, we see no merit in the other issues raised by the appellant – tuition expenses, health and dental premiums, storage and internet expenses, resulting and constructive trusts respecting the matrimonial home, and costs.

[5] The appeal is allowed to the extent of reducing the retroactive support order by $5658. In all other respects, the appeal is dismissed.

[6] In the circumstances of this appeal, we are of the view that the respondent is entitled to a modest recovery of costs which we fix at $5000 inclusive of disbursements and GST.

[7] Pursuant to the order of Blair J.A. dated 3 April 2007, “the balance of the sale proceeds being held in trust” are now ordered to be released to the respondent.