ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT FILE NO. FS-12-376681
DATE: 20120830

ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN: CORINNE DENISE CLARK (Applicant)

AND: SHARAD KERUR (Respondent)

BEFORE: M.A. SANDERSON J.

COUNSEL:
Mr. Michael B. Kleinman for the Applicant
Mr. Gordon E. Wood for the Respondent

ENDORSEMENT re COSTS

[ 1 ] In my endorsement dated and released July 5, 2012, I invited the parties to make written costs submissions on or before July 16, 2012.

[ 2 ] The wife sought an Order for table child support in the amount of $1,201 per month and took the position that RESP funds should be used only to pay tuition and related costs, not to cover Gina's room and board while studying (when she was living at home.)

[ 3 ] The husband took the position that RESP funds should be used to fund her educational and living costs and that he should pay support amounting to the difference between the amount of the RESP payments and the amounts she would need for her educational expenses.

[ 4 ] I ordered that the RESP be available to pay room and board as well as tuition and books wherever Gina chose to live while she studied.

[ 5 ] I also ordered the husband to pay table support during the summer months.

[ 6 ] On the issue of spousal support, the wife sought payments at "the higher of $4,336 or the high amount" pursuant to the SSAG Guidelines. At the return of the motion, her counsel submitted she should receive spousal support of $5,361 per month.

[ 7 ] Counsel for the husband submitted he should be ordered to pay spousal support in the range of $3,212-$4,282.

[ 8 ] On an interim basis, this Court ordered him to pay spousal support of $3,500 monthly. I ordered that the issue of retroactive support be left to the trial judge.

[ 9 ] While it was necessary to proceed with her motion for child care and spousal support because the husband had not been paying appropriate support, success on the motion was divided.

[ 10 ] The Order of the Court was less favourable to the wife than her settlement offer.

[ 11 ] The husband made no offer to settle the motion. However, this Court largely accepted his submissions and held that RESP monies should be applied not only to tuition and book expenses but also to living costs.

[ 12 ] Given the very divided success, I am of the view that there should be no order as to costs; that is, each party should bear his or her own costs of the motion.

M.A. SANDERSON J.

Released: