2 total
The successful respondent was awarded $5,000 in costs after her offer to settle in a settlement conference brief failed to trigger full recovery.
This is a costs decision following a trial in a family law matter involving child and spousal support.
The applicant sought to terminate spousal support and set child support at a lower income level, while the respondent sought continuation of support at a higher imputed income.
The respondent was substantially successful at trial.
The court awarded costs to the respondent in the amount of $5,000.00, inclusive of all taxes and disbursements, payable within 90 days.
The court found that while the respondent's offer to settle was more favourable than the trial outcome, it did not meet the formal requirements of Rule 18 of the Family Law Rules as it was contained in a settlement conference brief rather than served separately.
The court dismissed a father's motion to set aside a separation agreement but varied support obligations due to a material change in custody and imputed income to the self-employed father.
The applicant sought to set aside a separation agreement dated May 30, 2011, or alternatively, to vary it based on material changes in circumstances.
The applicant claimed the respondent misrepresented her living situation by failing to disclose that she was moving in with her former spouse.
The applicant also sought to reduce child and spousal support payments and rescind arrears.
The court dismissed the motion to set aside the agreement, finding no material misrepresentation that would justify rescission.
However, the court found a material change in circumstances when the custody arrangement changed in March 2012, warranting variation of the support provisions.
The court imputed income to the applicant based on his failure to provide adequate financial disclosure and adjusted both child and spousal support accordingly.
