SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO
COURT FILE NO.: FS-12-7-6555-00
DATE: 2014-06-25
RE: Aneta Irena Wielgus, Applicant
and
Adebola (“Mike”) Adewole, Respondent
BEFORE: Lemon J.
COUNSEL:
G. V. Deokaran, for the Applicant
Adebola Adewole, no one appearing
HEARD: June 18, 2014
ENDORSEMENT
ISSUE
[1] Aneta Irena Wielgus seeks an order for custody and access, child support, spousal support and an equalization of the parties’ net family property.
BACKGROUND
[2] The parties moved in together 1999 and separated March 13, 2012.
[3] They have four children ages three, 10, 14 and 15.
[4] Ms. Wielgus brought her application November 26, 2012. Mr. Adewole filed his Answer January 23, 2013 and disputed much, if not all, of what Ms. Wielgus alleged. Interim orders were obtained, some of which were on consent. Of significance however, Mr. Adewole left this jurisdiction without notice on August 2, 2013. He has not paid support or mortgage payments since that time. It appears that he is in Nigeria and will be there for the foreseeable future.
[5] On June 10, 2014, Ricchetti J. struck Mr. Adewole’s pleadings. Accordingly, this matter proceeded before me as an uncontested hearing.
CUSTODY AND ACCESS
[6] On September 12, 2013, Herold J. granted Ms. Wielgus interim sole custody and primary residence of all four children of the marriage. Without the involvement of Mr. Adewole, there is no evidence before me that would indicate that custody of the children should change. A final order shall issue for custody of all of the children to Ms.Wielgus.
[7] Ms. Wielgus requests an order that Mr. Adewole have access to the children every other weekend if and when he returns to Canada. Given that request, that too shall follow as an order.
CHILD SUPPORT
[8] While Mr. Adewole was involved in the proceedings, he filed an income tax return showing a 2011 income of $132,212.47. His financial statement sworn January 23, 2013 indicated an annual income of $132,849.96. I note that the parties entered into a consent order on January 4, 2013 that required Mr. Adewole to pay a total of $3,805 per month for both child and spousal support. He has apparently provided no other evidence with respect to his income.
[9] Again without Mr. Adewole’s involvement, I am left to impute an income to him to determine child support. Ms. Wielgus submits that I should impute an income of $132,214. On the evidence before me, that seems entirely appropriate. One can presume that Mr. Adewole has an ability to earn that much and is unlikely to have left such a job without a better prospect.
[10] Based on that annual income, the Child Support Guidelines indicate support for four children at $2789 per month. I order support in that amount commencing January 4, 2013, as requested by Ms. Wielgus. If Mr. Adewole has paid any support against the interim order of January 4, 2013, he shall be given credit for those payments.
SPOUSAL SUPPORT
[11] Imputing the same annual income of $132,214 to Mr. Adewole, Ms. Wielgus seeks a lump sum spousal support payment of $159,648. This is based on the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines mid-range amount calculated as a lump sum according to the DivorceMate software. It presumes support for 12 years and six months based on a marriage/cohabitation of 14 years. Finally, it presumes that Ms. Wielgus is unemployed and will remain that way for some time.
[12] It appears that Mr. Adewole had, and likely has, an ability to support his family but simply seeks to ignore them and the court process by fleeing the jurisdiction. Unless lump sum support is ordered, I am satisfied that it is unlikely that the family will receive the proper support from him.
[13] The evidence at present is that Ms. Wielgus is unemployed although she is attempting to retrain as a mortgage agent. She has been surviving on child tax benefits.
[14] On that evidence, I am satisfied that lump sum support in the amount of $159,648 is appropriate.
DIVISION OF PROPERTY
[15] On October 11, 2013, Herold J. ordered the title and mortgage to the matrimonial home at 233 Vodden Street West, Brampton be transferred to Ms. Wielgus and to be held by her pending final disposition of the matter. She has managed to resolve a debt action brought by Royal Bank of Canada with respect to the mortgage along with the credit line, overdraft and credit card debts owing by Mr. Adewole and secured against the home. She has now arranged a refinancing of the mortgage if the home is transferred to her on a final basis.
[16] A Net Family Property statement and a variety of supporting documents were filed before me. Those documents support the calculation of an equalization payment of $84,253.31 assuming that Ms. Wielgus retains the home in Brampton and Mr. Adewole retains a home in Oshawa and a timeshare.
[17] Ms. Wielgus wishes to retain the timeshare for her and the children’s benefit. It appears that Mr. Adewole has no need of it. That asset is valued at $5000. I am satisfied that the timeshare should be transferred to Ms. Wielgus in partial payment of the lump sum spousal support set out above.
COSTS
[18] Ms. Wielgus seeks costs in the amount of $1000. She has been entirely successful. Mr. Adewole’s conduct has required her to obtain counsel. The amount requested is exceedingly low. I have no difficulty ordering that amount in costs.
RESULT
[19] Based on the above:
(a) Ms. Wielgus shall have custody of Michelle Wielgus (D.O.B. April 4, 1999); Alexander Adewole (D.O.B. April 15, 2000); Maximilian Adewole (D.O.B. June 3, 2004) and Audrey Adewole (D.O.B. December 19, 2010) subject to the respondent father’s access in Canada every other weekend.
(b) Mr. Adewole shall pay child support for the four children of the marriage in the amount of $2789 per month based on an annual income of $132,214.
(c) Mr. Adewole shall pay lump sum spousal support in the amount of $159,648. That amount shall be reduced by the amount set out in paragraphs (d) and (f), below, to $70,394.69.
(d) In partial payment of the lump sum set out above, the timeshare shall be transferred to Ms. Wielgus at a value of $5000.
(e) The property located at 233 Vodden Street West, Brampton, Ontario shall remain in the name of Aneta Irena Wielgus free of any claim by Mr. Adewole.
(f) Ms. Wielgus shall pay an equalization payment to Mr. Adewole in the amount of $84,253.31. This amount shall be set off against the lump sum spousal support set out above at paragraph (c).
(g) Mr. Adewole shall pay $1000 in costs to Ms. Wielgus.
Lemon J.
Date: June 25, 2014
COURT FILE NO.: FS-12-7-6555-00
DATE: 2014-06-25
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO
RE: Aneta Irena Wielgus
and
Adebola (“Mike”) Adewole
BEFORE: Lemon, J.
COUNSEL: G. V. Deokaran, for the Applicant
Adebola Adewole, no one appearing
ENDORSEMENT
Lemon, J.
DATE: June 25, 2014