Losier v. Losier, 2016 ONSC 7826
Court File No.: D24975/15
Date: 2016-12-13
Superior Court of Justice – Ontario
Re: Wendy Mary Losier
And: Leonel Losier
Before: Mr Justice Ramsay
Counsel: Dean J.D. Moldenhauer for the Applicant Angelo Fazari for the Respondent
Heard: December 13, 2016
Endorsement
[1] The Applicant moves for interim spousal support.
[2] The parties were living together and then married for 28 years. They have three grown children. They separated in 2013. The Respondent voluntarily paid $500 a month spousal support from July 2013 to December 2014 in the hopes of a reconciliation. When he gave up on that idea he stopped paying.
[3] The Applicant submits that the Respondent should be paying between $500 and $800 a month on an interim basis. The Respondent says that the Applicant has not shown a justification for any amount of spousal support.
[4] In the latter years of the marriage the parties earned about $40,000 each. That state of affairs has remained constant since. The Respondent’s income comes from a WSIB pension. He is trained as an auto mechanic. He has carpal tunnel syndrome in both arms, a bad knee and a learning disability.
[5] The Applicant says that income should be imputed to the Respondent for the following reasons:
a. During the money the Respondent earned money from snow ploughing.
b. On his first financial statement the Respondent claims $54,000 in annual expenses, an amount that has been reduced to $35,000 in subsequent financial statements.
c. There are unexplained deposits into his early post-separation bank accounts.
d. He goes to his best friend’s residence/shop most days for 8 hours at a time, where he could be earning cash by fixing cars.
[6] The first three factors are readily explained. The Respondent never earned much money from snow ploughing and he no longer owns the beaten up old truck that he used. The $54,000 in expenses were paid in part by cashing in an RRSP, which fact is documented. The deposits are explained as transitional measures at a time when the Respondent was switching bank accounts.
[7] As to the fourth item, the Respondent deposes that he goes to his friend’s place to socialize. He does not work and he does not get paid. At most he has done the odd favour for his friend by delivering portable toilets and his friend may have done some favours for him. The friend supports this account in his affidavit. On the state of the evidence as it is now, I am not prepared to disbelieve them.
[8] The motion is dismissed with costs to the Respondent in the agreed amount of $3,000, forthwith.
J.A. Ramsay J.
Date: 2016-12-13