Pamila Bhardwaj

The applicant mother sought child support from the respondent father for their eight-year-old child.

The father claimed he had no ability to pay, citing his pursuit of a professional football career and full-time university enrollment.

The court found the father was intentionally underemployed and imputed income to him based on his capacity to earn.

The court rejected the father's argument that his educational and athletic pursuits justified non-payment of child support, finding that parental obligations take precedence over personal career aspirations.

The court imputed income at $25,000 per annum retroactive to December 1, 2014, and $30,000 per annum from January 1, 2016, resulting in monthly child support obligations of $200 and $245 respectively.

The husband sought leave to appeal an interlocutory family law order that dismissed his motion for temporary sole custody of the parties' special needs children and granted the wife's motion regarding the transfer of the matrimonial home.

The husband argued he was denied procedural fairness and that the motion judge erred in calculating his share of the home's equity.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, finding no reason to doubt the correctness of the motion judge's order, noting the husband had failed to follow court directions regarding the children's lawyer and that the financial calculations were appropriate.