The parties divorced after twelve years of marriage.
The respondent wife was granted custody of their children and an alimentary pension.
She subsequently completed a Master's degree but was unable to find full-time employment.
The appellant husband applied to vary the corollary relief, seeking to terminate the spousal support on the basis that the respondent was now employable.
The Superior Court ordered the pension to terminate in eight months.
The Court of Appeal reversed this, maintaining the pension.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the husband's appeal, holding that variation of support under section 11(2) of the Divorce Act must be based on actual, present circumstances rather than hypothetical future events such as the prospect of employment.
