This is a trial decision concerning the allocation of garnished funds owed by the respondent to the applicant.
The parties had multiple outstanding debts from a prior divorce order, including child support, spousal support (lump sum and arrears), and property equalization payments.
The respondent argued that garnished funds should first be applied to spousal support due to its priority under the Creditors' Relief Act.
The court held that the Creditors' Relief Act's priority provisions apply to multiple creditors, not to the allocation of undifferentiated payments from a single debtor to multiple debts owed to the same creditor.
Applying the common law principle of apportionment, the court ruled that the applicant, as the creditor, had the discretion to allocate the garnished funds to maximize her recovery, specifically by applying them first to the property-related debts, allowing the lump sum spousal support to be enforced by the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) and thus survive potential bankruptcy.