ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
Steven Ronald Orville Pinkham
Applicant
– and –
Julie Erin Denison
Respondent
Timothy N. Sullivan, for the Applicant
Michael H. Barnhart, for the Respondent
HEARD: September 29, 2014
DECISION ON MOTION
K. PHILLIPS J.
1The parties are before the court because of difficulties preventing the implementation of a Final Separation Agreement/Minutes of Settlement prepared with the assistance of a mediator on April 30, 2014.
2The central issue in dispute involves whether Section 7 extraordinary expenses incurred by the Respondent Mother shall, despite objection regarding their appropriateness and reasonableness by the Applicant Father, be deducted by her from the child support she is obliged to pay him. The Applicant asserts that such an outcome would allow the Respondent the unilateral ability to undermine the child support the children are entitled to. For her part, the Respondent insists that the Section 7 expenses are reasonably incurred and that the Applicant is being unreasonable in not agreeing to pay his share of them. She submits that allowing her to offset the disputed Section 7 amounts against what she owes in child support is a fair and expeditious way to accommodate the best interests of the children and keep the parties from having to repeatedly attend court.
3I agree with the Applicant Father on this point. For child support to achieve its function it must, as far as possible, be predictable and regular. A regimen that would allow one party’s decisions to unilaterally alter the amount of child support payable would lead to unpredictability, arbitrariness and conflict. Such a result would be contrary to the best interests of the children. It also strikes me as unfair to structure a system where a child support recipient has to take a non-payor to court to have the unilateral decisions underlying the non-payment reviewed.
4Any dispute by either party with respect to the other unreasonably withholding consent regarding proposed or incurred extraordinary expenses should be dealt with a separate motion on a case-by-case basis.
5The Final Draft Separation Agreement/Minutes of Settlement prepared by Carol Cochrane on April 30, 2014 should be put into effect as a binding agreement, albeit with the following changes:
that paragraph 3.16A be amended to delete the words, “failing which, the party owed such contribution shall be entitled to offset such contribution from child support payable by him or her pursuant to paragraph 3.3 above”;
that paragraph 3.16A be amended to add the words, “the party to be reimbursed shall provide proof of payment”
6I also make the following orders:
that the Applicant pay to the Respondent the sum of $5,313.04 after taking into account an offset for child support payable by the Respondent from March 1, 2014 to and including September 2014 and following such payment by the Applicant, the Respondent will pay child support in the amount of $331 per month in accordance with paragraph 8.10 of the Draft Final Separation Agreement/Minutes of Settlement;
that the Applicant confirm the division of the children for income tax purposes for the year 2013;
that the Applicant make arrangements for dental claim insurance reimbursements regarding the children of the marriage be payable to both the Applicant and the Respondent;
that the Applicant pay to the Respondent the sum of $400.62 for his one half share of special and extraordinary expenses for the children incurred by the Respondent as of May 14, 2014;
that the Applicant be allowed a credit regarding his one half payment of special and extraordinary expenses for the children as agreed to by the Respondent as of May 14, 2014.
7Each party shall bear their own costs with respect to this motion.
The Honourable Mr. Justice Kevin B. Phillips
Released: October 1, 2014
COURT FILE NO.: FC-10-2552
DATE: 2014/10/01
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
Steven Ronald Orville Pinkham
Applicant
– and –
Julie Erin Denison
Respondent
DECISION ON MOTION
K. PHILLIPS J.
Released: October 1, 2014