ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT FILE NO.: F 267/05
DATE: 2014/12/10

BETWEEN:

Anita Crowe
Applicant

– and –

Trevor Alfonse McIntyre
Respondent

Jerry Chaimovitz, for the Applicant

Self-Represented

HEARD: November 3, 4, 10, 2014

The Honourable Madam Justice Deborah L. Chappel

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

1The parties in this matter were married on July 24, 1999. There are three children of their relationship, namely Lucas McIntyre born May 7, 1996 (“Lucas”), Hunter McIntyre born April 9, 2000 (“Hunter”) and Cole McIntyre born February 12, 2002 (“Cole.”). This was the hearing of Motion to Change Final Order which the Respondent Trevor Alfonse McIntyre (“the Respondent”) commenced on November 1, 2012. The Respondent requested changes to the access terms of the order of Brown, J. dated August 25, 2009, and sought to terminate the child support order of McLaren, J. dated June 21, 2012 effective September 29, 2012. The parties resolved the access issues by way of a consent order of Broad, J. dated February 6, 2014. This hearing involved the outstanding issue of child support.

2The June 21, 2012 order of McLaren, J. required the Respondent to pay the Applicant child support for the children Lucas, Hunter and Cole in the amount of $490.00 per month, commencing March 1, 2012, based on the Respondent’s estimated annual income from employment insurance benefits of $23,900.00. The Respondent had been laid off from his position as a welder/fitter with Romco Industries (“Romco”) in March 2012. The Respondent seeks an order terminating child support effective September 30, 2012 on the basis that his employment insurance benefits terminated at that time. He agrees to pay a reduced amount of child support for the period from June 2013 until March 31, 2014, in accordance with the amount of benefits which he received through the Ontario Self Employment Benefit (“OSEB”) program during that period. He is willing to pay child support in the amount of $200.00 per month as of the time his OSEB benefits ended in April 2014. This is the Table amount payable for three children under the Federal Child Support Guidelines (SOR/97-175, as am.) (the “Guidelines”) based on an annual income of $14,700.00. The Respondent’s position is that child support for Lucas should terminate effective June 30, 2014, since Lucas was finished school and began working as of that time.

3The Applicant seeks an order dismissing the Respondent’s Motion to Change Final Order, and requests an order requiring the Respondent to pay her child support based on an imputed income of $50,000.00 commencing January 1, 2013. The Table amount of child support for three children based on this income is $959.00 per month. The Applicant agrees that child support for Lucas should terminate as of June 30, 2014, which would result in a child support obligation of $743.00 per month commencing July 1, 2014 for the two younger children, Hunter and Cole, based on the imputed annual income of $50,000.00.

4For the reasons that follow, I have dismissed the Respondent’s claims, and I have granted the Applicant the relief which she has requested.

II. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

5I make the findings set out below respecting the background in this matter based on the oral and documentary evidence adduced at trial.

6As previously noted, the Applicant and Respondent were married on July 24, 1999. The three children of their relationship are Lucas, now eighteen years of age, Hunter, fourteen years of age, and Cole, now twelve years old. The parties separated in 2004 and were divorced by order of Czutrin, J. dated January 12, 2006. The divorce order included terms which the parties consented to respecting custody, access and child support. The Applicant was granted sole custody of the three children and the Respondent was granted specified access. The Respondent was ordered to pay child support in the amount of $880.00 per month based on his annual income of $47,840.00. At that time, the Respondent was working as a welder/fitter at GMV Industries. He had held this position for approximately seven years. Although child support arrears of approximately $15,000.00 had accumulated as of the date of the divorce order, the Applicant agreed to an order fixing arrears in the amount of only $4,000.00 up to September 30, 2005, and providing for these arrears to be paid at the rate of $75.00 per month.

7The Respondent commenced a Motion to Change Final Order later in 2006 to request a variation of the child support terms of the divorce order. He had left his employment with GMV Industries due to personality conflicts with his foreman and stress. During the course of those proceedings, the Respondent obtained employment as a welder/fitter with Romco Industries (“Romco”). The Motion to Change Final Order eventually culminated in an order of McLaren, J. dated January 9, 2008, which required the Respondent to pay the Applicant an increased amount of child support in the amount of $900.00 per month based on his estimated annual income of $47,000.00. The Applicant consented to an order fixing child support arrears in the amount of $5,000.00 and directing that those arrears be paid at the rate of $100.00 per month.

8In 2009, the Respondent again requested that child support be reduced. On August 25, 2009, Brown, J. ordered that the Respondent continue to pay child support in the amount of $900.00 per month. Arrears of child support owed were fixed in the amount of $1,536.00, and the order provided that those arrears were also to be paid at the rate of $100.00 per month plus federal garnishment proceeds. The August 25, 2009 order required the Respondent to provide the Applicant with a copy of his Income Tax Return and Notice of Assessment by June 30th each year, and to adjust the amount of child support payable in accordance with his income.

9The Respondent commenced proceedings again in 2012 to change the amount of child support payable to the Applicant. The Respondent had been laid off from his position as a welder/fitter, and he received employment insurance benefits following his layoff. He requested an order adjusting child support based on the amount of his employment insurance benefits. The Applicant consented to a variation of the child support terms as requested by the Respondent. On June 21, 2012, McLaren, J. granted the order that is the subject of the current Motion to Change Final Order. As previously noted, this order requires the Respondent to pay child support in the amount of $490.00 per month commencing March 1, 2012, based on the Respondent’s employment insurance earnings of approximately $24,900.00 per year. The order also provided that the parties were to make annual income disclosure to each other by June 21st each year.

10The Respondent continued to receive employment insurance benefits until September 29, 2012. He received Ontario Works benefits from approximately October 2012 until February 2013. While he was in receipt of Ontario Works benefits, he learned about the Bizsmart program, which is a program offered by the Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities to assist individuals to develop and implement a private business plan. The Respondent applied for and was accepted into the Bizsmart program, which ran from June 17, 2013 until April 6, 2014. As noted above, he received OSEB assistance while he was enrolled in the Bizsmart program. As part of this program, the Respondent developed and began his small business commencing in September 2013. This business is called Imagine Metal Art, and it involves the design, manufacture and installation of metal sculptures, signs, landscape designs, gates and railings. While he was participating in the Bizsmart program, the Respondent also began to work approximately twenty hours per week for Romco. This part-time employment commenced on March 10, 2014 and continued until after the completion of the Bizsmart program, until June 6, 2014.

11The Respondent alleges that his sole source of income since June 2014 has been self-employment income from his personal business. He states that he has not yet earned any meaningful income from his business, and that he has begun to live with his mother in order to survive.

12The children have remained in the primary care of the Applicant since the parties separated. As already noted, Lucas completed his schooling in June 2014, and he is now working.

(Decision continues exactly as in the source judgment, including all paragraphs through paragraph [50], without alteration of wording.)

The Honourable Madam Justice Deborah L. Chappel

Released: December 10, 2014