R.I. Robertson

Following dismissal of a motion to vary a long-standing child support order after a half-day trial, the court considered costs under Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules.

The successful party sought approximately $14,684 in partial indemnity costs.

The court held that costs associated with earlier proceedings such as a settlement conference and Dispute Resolution Officer appearance could not be claimed because costs were not reserved to the trial judge.

The court also reduced travel time and mileage charges for out-of-town counsel, finding that absent evidence local counsel was unavailable such additional costs should not be borne by the opposing party.

Taking into account the respondent’s lack of preparation and the overall circumstances, the court awarded reduced costs.

The respondent to a motion to change child support sought a retroactive increase in support and reimbursement of s.7 expenses.

The court found that a “kitchen table” agreement reducing support was unenforceable due to lack of disclosure and legal advice.

Applying the principles in D.B.S. v. S.R.G., the court awarded retroactive child support for three years prior to the motion and imputed income to the payor after he failed to provide financial disclosure and voluntarily reduced his income.

Arrears were calculated for multiple years taking into account one child reaching the age of majority and attending post‑secondary education.

The court also ordered partial reimbursement of post‑secondary expenses and prospective contribution toward medical orthotics.