Court File and Parties
COURT FILE NO.: FC-19-1083 DATE: January 16, 2020 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Meaghan Izidora Frank -and- William Tyler Campbell
BEFORE: Justice P. MacEachern
COUNSEL: Adrienne Curran
HEARD: January 16, 2020
Endorsement
1.
Endorsement
An uncontested trial was heard today.
Ms. Frank filed this Application on July 9, 2019. The Application includes a claim for a Divorce.
Ms. Frank had Mr. Campbell served with her Application on June 24, 2019. Mr. Campbell has not filed an Answer and is in default.
The parties married on June 9, 2017. They separated on November 29, 2018. They have one child, W.J.C, born [redacted].
Parenting
5.
Parenting
Ms. Frank seeks an order for joint custody of the child, but that in the event the parties do not agree, she has final decision making. Ms. Frank seeks an order for primary residence of the child to be with her, with Mr. Campbell having regular alternating weekend access, mid-week access, and holiday access.
- The evidence before me supports that the parenting terms sought by Ms. Frank are in the best interests of the child, and I find this to be so. These parenting arrangements reflect the existing status quo and also provide a mechanism for custodial decisions to be made for the child if the parties are unable to agree.
Child Support
7.
Child Support
Ms. Frank seeks an order for child support, commencing February 1, 2020, based on Mr. Campbell’s income being determined to be $35,000 per year. Ms. Frank’s evidence is that Mr. Campbell advised her that he has “stepped down” from his previous position and taken a new position, at lower pay, as a Customer Service Representative with Allstate Insurance, with an annual salary of $35,000.
While I am prepared to find that Mr. Campbell’s income for child support purposes is $35,000 per year, I do note that this finding is generous to Mr. Campbell. Except for the fact that Ms. Frank is prepared to accept that Mr. Campbell’s income is $35,000 for child support purposes, I would have determined his income to be $45,000 per year. Mr. Campbell had notice of Ms. Frank’s position was that his income was approximately $45,000 per year, as this is included in her Application served on him. He chose not to respond to the Application, or to provide other evidence of his income. And although he has stated to Ms. Frank that his income has been reduced, he has not provided supporting evidence of this reduction, or reasons why he should not be considered to be voluntarily underemployed.
I make these comments regarding Mr. Campbell’s income because I do not want him to expect that he will receive a similar generous approach to determining his income in the future, if the child support is sought to be varied, and, in particular, if he fails to respond to the proceedings or fails to provide the annual income disclosure as ordered herein.
Mr. Campbell is therefore ordered to pay child support to Ms. Frank, commencing February 1, 2020, and continuing on the first day of each subsequent month, for the benefit of W.J.C., born [redacted], of $304 per month, based on Mr. Campbell’s income being determined to be $35,000 per year.
Section 7 expenses
11.
Section 7 expenses
Ms. Frank seeks an order requiring Mr. Campbell to pay one-half of the child’s section 7 expenses, including child care expenses.
Ms. Frank’s current income is determined to be $45,000 per year, based on her position with the Ministry of the Attorney General.
I find the child care expenses to be section 7 expenses according to section 7 of the Child Support Guidelines.
Mr. Campbell’s income is 43.8% of the parties’ combined incomes (see attached child support calculation). Given Ms. Frank’s generous position on the determination of Mr. Campbell’s income, I find that it is fair and just to order an equal sharing of the child’s section 7 expenses.
The parties have been paying the child care expenses equally to the child care provider, before any tax deductions. Mr. Campbell is, however, entitled to benefit from the tax deductions that reduce the net cost of the child care expenses. It may be, however, that due to CRA requirements, the tax deduction for child care expenses may only be claimed by Ms. Frank. If both parties are not able to claim their respective share of the child care expenses, Ms. Frank shall claim all of the child care expenses and remit 50% of the resulting savings to Mr. Campbell within 30 days of receipt.
Ms. Frank seeks an order requiring both parties to maintain medical, dental and extended health coverage for the child. I find this is an appropriate order and make this order with terms as set out in the Applicant’s draft order.
Life Insurance
17.
Life Insurance
Ms. Frank seeks an order that Mr. Campbell maintain life insurance to secure his child support obligation with coverage of $125,000.
- This amount is based on the estimate contained in the attached child support calculations, plus an additional amount to reflect s.7 expenses. I find it appropriate to order Mr. Campbell to secure his child support obligation by maintaining life insurance coverage of $125,000 on the terms set out in the Applicant’s draft order.
Equalization Payment
19.
Equalization Payment
Ms. Frank’s Application included a claim for equalization, but she confirms that she withdraws this claim. I, therefore, do not make any order regarding the equalization of the parties’ respective net family properties.
Divorce
20.
Divorce
Ms. Frank seeks a divorce in her Application. Given this, the corollary relief issues should be incorporated into the final Divorce Order. Ms. Frank needs to file her Marriage Certificate, affidavit in support of a divorce, and draft divorce order for a divorce to issue. A Clearance Certificate is also needed.
- Counsel shall provide me with a draft Divorce Order incorporating the corollary relief, for my signature, with the supporting court documents (affidavit, marriage certificate) on or before February 7, 2020.
Disposition
22.
Disposition
Given my reasons above, I make the following orders: a. A final Divorce Order shall issue with the corollary relief on the terms set out in the Applicant’s draft Order (attached), modified as required given the above. These modifications should include: i. Adding in Ms. Frank’s income, either at paragraph 14 or elsewhere; ii. Revising paragraph 15 to provide that If both parties are not able to claim their respective share of the child care expenses, Ms. Frank shall claim all of the child care expenses and remit 50% of the resulting savings to Mr. Campbell within 30 days of receipt.
Costs
23.
Costs
Ms. Frank did not seek an order for costs. She would have otherwise been entitled to some recovery for her costs. Accordingly, I order each party to bear their own costs of this proceeding.