William Shanks

Following a family law motion concerning interim spousal support and related relief, the court determined the issue of costs.

The moving party had obtained interim spousal support and reinstatement of extended health coverage, though the support amount awarded was approximately half of what was requested and income had been partially imputed.

The court applied the presumption under Rule 24(1) that a successful party is entitled to costs but considered the mixed success, the absence of an offer to settle, and unnecessary attendances due to adjournments.

A reduced costs award was therefore fixed as fair and reasonable, payable at the conclusion of the trial and subject to variation depending on the outcome of the retroactive support issue.

The responding spouse brought a motion seeking interim spousal support and related procedural relief in a family law proceeding following a 25‑year marriage.

The dispute centered on the proper determination of the respondent spouse’s income where he operated through a closely‑held corporation.

The court considered whether retained corporate earnings and certain business expenses should be attributed as personal income for support purposes.

Finding that some retained earnings and personal-use components of corporate vehicle and utility expenses should be imputed, the court fixed the respondent spouse’s income at approximately $66,258 for interim purposes.

Applying the Divorce Act and the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, the court ordered interim spousal support pending trial.