Henderson v. Bal

Henderson v. Bal

Court found father deliberately reduced his income and failed to provide full disclosure; imputed reasonable incomes for 2014 ($45,025), 2015 (annualized to $36,497 after imputation) and 2016 ($46,368) for child support calculation, rejected father's claim that S voluntarily withdrew from his charge and dismissed his application to terminate or reduce support for S, awarded retroactive arrears and ongoing monthly support, ordered annual exchange of financial information and refused to impose a fine due to insufficient specification of rule breaches.

Citation
2016 BCSC 858
Parties
Claimant (mother): Zoe Ann Henderson; Respondent (father): Santokh Singh Bal
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Support and Parenting / Application to Vary/terminate Trial Order (post Trial Applications)
Outcome
Mother largely successful; father's application to terminate or decrease child support for S dismissed.
Legal Topics
Child Support, Parenting Time, Spousal Support, Imputation of Income, WCB Benefits, Special Expenses (s.7), Disclosure of Financial Information, Variation of Order
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Parenting Time Spousal Support Imputation of Income WCB Benefits Special Expenses (s.7) Disclosure of Financial Information +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zoe Ann Henderson

Claimant (mother)

Santokh Singh Bal

Respondent (father)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Support and Parenting / Application to Vary/terminate Trial Order (post Trial Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Determination and imputation of father's income for 2014, 2015 and 2016 for child support
  2. 2 Whether father should be relieved of child support obligation to S (voluntary withdrawal from charge)
  3. 3 Whether special expenses (music, hockey) should be shared under s.7 of Guidelines

Ratio Decidendi

Court found father deliberately reduced his income and failed to provide full disclosure; imputed reasonable incomes for 2014 ($45,025), 2015 (annualized to $36,497 after imputation) and 2016 ($46,368) for child support calculation, rejected father's claim that S voluntarily withdrew from his charge and dismissed his application to terminate or reduce support for S, awarded retroactive arrears and ongoing monthly support, ordered annual exchange of financial information and refused to impose a fine due to insufficient specification of rule breaches.

Court Disposition

Mother largely successful; father's application to terminate or decrease child support for S dismissed.

Orders

  • Father to pay forthwith arrears of child support totalling 11380.00 CAD
  • Father to pay ongoing child support of 703.00 CAD per month beginning May 2016 and thereafter on the 15th day of each month while children remain 'child' under s.146 FLA