The appellant appealed a motion judge's order requiring him to pay $1,200 per month in spousal support following his retirement.
He argued the motion judge erred by providing insufficient reasons, miscalculating incomes, allowing 'double dipping' from his previously equalized pension, and ordering support indefinitely.
The Divisional Court dismissed most grounds of appeal, finding the motion judge properly applied the exceptions to the rule against double dipping.
However, the court allowed the appeal in part to add a provision allowing either party to apply to vary the order when the respondent begins drawing her pension.
