Pierrette Rayle

The parties separated after a marriage under the regime of separation of property.

The husband went bankrupt and was discharged before the wife filed for divorce and claimed a compensatory allowance and lump sum support.

The trial judge awarded the wife $40,000.

The Court of Appeal set aside the award, finding the husband's bankruptcy barred the compensatory allowance and the wife had waived her alimentary claim.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that the bankruptcy discharge did not bar the compensatory allowance claim, as it was not a provable claim in bankruptcy, and the trial judge properly found an alimentary claim was before him.

The parties divorced after twelve years of marriage.

The respondent wife was granted custody of their children and an alimentary pension.

She subsequently completed a Master's degree but was unable to find full-time employment.

The appellant husband applied to vary the corollary relief, seeking to terminate the spousal support on the basis that the respondent was now employable.

The Superior Court ordered the pension to terminate in eight months.

The Court of Appeal reversed this, maintaining the pension.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the husband's appeal, holding that variation of support under section 11(2) of the Divorce Act must be based on actual, present circumstances rather than hypothetical future events such as the prospect of employment.