Court File and Parties
Court File No.: D25614/16 Date: 2017/04/10
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Between:
Roger William Watson Self-represented Applicant (Responding Party)
- and -
Eileen Ruth Watson Respondent (Moving Party) James D. Almas, for the Respondent/Moving Party
Heard: Long Motion at Welland: April 7, 2017
Before: The Honourable Justice T. Maddalena
Endorsement on Motion
[1] The motion on behalf of the respondent is for temporary ongoing spousal support and retroactive spousal support.
[2] There is a motion brought by the applicant for exclusive possession of the matrimonial home, including other relief. This motion was withdrawn by the applicant at the hearing of the long motion.
[3] The applicant and the respondent were married on the 19th of February 1987. They separated on the 28th of November 2014. They continued to live separate and apart under the same roof until January 2015. The applicant is 52 years of age and the respondent is 54 years of age.
[4] They have one daughter, Alicia, born March 13, 1991. She is, therefore, currently 26 years of age and has graduated in December 2016 from the Masters program at Niagara University. She is now employed fulltime.
[5] Although the applicant has raised issues of post-secondary expenses for Alicia, there are no materials in the motion before the court dealing with this issue.
[6] Therefore, the sole issue for the motion before the court is whether the respondent is entitled to ongoing spousal support and retroactive spousal support from the applicant.
[7] The applicant submits that this court ought to make no order for support or, alternatively, liability for spousal support should be considered either at the trial of this matter or later when the applicant and the respondent have both filed completed and corrected financial statements.
[8] I find the respondent has filed a completed financial statement which is before the court and is sworn February 4, 2017. In addition, the financial statement has been supplemented by the respondent with ongoing disclosure. I find that the financial statement filed by the applicant, sworn 28th July 2016, is incomplete.
[9] This is a long-term traditional marriage of 28 years. There has been a disadvantage to the respondent of being a stay-at-home mom for a period of time. Her financial statement demonstrates a need for ongoing support.
[10] Based on the motion evidence, I find that the respondent has done whatever she could to secure employment post-separation in an attempt to attain self-sufficiency.
[11] She has gone to Florida for employment and when that employment ended, she then went to Northern Ontario (Muskoka) to find what work she could. Now that has ended and she finds herself without employment and no income.
[12] I find the respondent is diligently looking for work. She is currently in need of support.
2015 Year
[13] Firstly, a review of the parties’ incomes post-separation is necessary.
[14] It is clear from the evidence that for the year 2015, the parties had similar incomes.
[15] The respondent’s 2015 income tax, according to the CRA tax assessment filed, was $78,736.
[16] The applicant’s 2015 income, according to his 2015 U.S. individual tax return was $69,074 U.S. or approximately $88,326 Cdn.
[17] I therefore find both parties had similar incomes for 2015 and I make no order for support for the year 2015.
2016 Year
[18] For the 2016 year, I find that the respondent earned approximately $46,073 Cdn.
[19] This consisted of employment income from the Florida employer up until May 27, 2016, plus the equivalent of unemployment insurance from the State of Florida.
[20] I find the applicant’s income for 2016 to be $99,020 Cdn. This consisted of the following:
- Weekly U.S. income of $1,200;
- U.S. interest income of $1,800 annually;
- U.S. pensions/annuity annual income of $10,541.
2017 Year
[21] For 2017 I find, based on all of the evidence, that the respondent’s income is approximately $23,700 to date. She is currently unemployed.
[22] Based on the evidence at this motion, the applicant’s 2017 income is likely to be similar to his 2016 income, which is approximately $99,000 Cdn. The applicant has not filed an updated sworn financial statement nor has he filed Canadian tax returns for the past several years.
[23] It is clear law that after a 28 year marriage, spouses owe one another a mutual duty of support. It is also trite law that the longer the marriage, the greater is the claim for standards of living that are equal and comparable upon dissolution.
[24] It is clear from the respondent’s sworn financial statement for this motion that the respondent has clear and substantial need for support. The applicant has the ability to pay.
[25] The respondent currently has no income. She lives in the basement of a home that she is part owner with her nephew. Her financial statement sworn the 4th of February 2017 shows bare bones expenses. The applicant continues to reside in the matrimonial home.
[26] This is a clear case for the applicability of the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines. The entitlement to support is clear, as well as the need of the respondent.
[27] Given the length of the marriage and the respective financial positions of each of the parties, the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines at the higher end is appropriate. It is perplexing to this court how the applicant spouse can take the position that no spousal support is payable under these circumstances.
Orders Made
[28] The following orders are made:
For the year 2015, there shall be no spousal support payable.
Commencing January 1, 2016 and continuing on the first day of each and every month thereafter, up to and including December 16, 2016, the applicant shall pay to the respondent as spousal support, the amount of $2,200 per month.
Commencing January 1, 2017 and continuing on the first day of each and every month thereafter, the applicant shall pay to the respondent as spousal support, the amount of $3,000 per month.
Support deduction order shall issue.
Costs
[29] The parties shall make written costs submissions, limited to two pages, plus a bill of costs and any applicable offers to settle. The respondent’s submissions are due by April 21, 2017 and the applicant’s submissions are due by May 5, 2017.
Maddalena J. Released: April 10, 2017