Stephanie Okola

This trial concerned the quantum and duration of spousal support for a long-term marriage (37 years).

The applicant sought $2,000 per month indefinitely or a $200,000 lump sum, while the respondent argued for minimal support and repayment of alleged overpayments.

The court found the respondent had substantially underpaid spousal support and equalization post-separation, leading to the applicant's economic disadvantage.

Considering the significant disparity in assets and means, the court awarded the applicant a lump sum payment of $200,000 and dismissed the respondent's claim for repayment.

The respondent father brought a motion to change a child support order dated September 8, 2009, which imputed his income at $45,000 and required him to pay $415 per month.

The father sought to reduce payments to $150 per month and reduce arrears to $5,000 with repayment at $50 per month.

The applicant mother agreed to a three-year credit for when the child was out of her care and proposed $250 per month arrears repayment.

The Ministry of Community and Social Services, as assignee of support arrears, opposed any reduction.

The court found the father failed to meet his onus to demonstrate changed circumstances warranting variation, noting his lack of credibility, incomplete financial disclosure, and evidence of actual income exceeding his claims.

The court granted only the three-year credit for the child's absence from the mother's care and ordered arrears repayment at $75 per month commencing October 1, 2016.