Anderson v. Anderson

Anderson v. Anderson

Arrears cannot be cancelled absent demonstration of prejudice, serious hardship or unfairness caused by delay; the father's unilateral failure to pay did not excuse him. The Federal Child Support Guidelines determine future payments and, although new family obligations are a relevant factor, s.10(3) bars reduction where the payor's household would remain better off after guideline payments. On the facts the father's household would remain better off, so the Chambers judge correctly ordered guideline support and refused to cancel arrears.

Citation
1999 BCCA 147
Parties
Petitioner (respondent Below): Judith Arlene Anderson; Respondent (appellant): Stephen Richard Anderson
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family Law Child Support/maintenance) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Chambers
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Child Support Guidelines, Arrears Cancellation, Variation of Maintenance, Enforcement of Support, Undue Hardship (s.10)
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Maintenance Appeals Child Support Guidelines Arrears Cancellation Variation of Maintenance Enforcement of Support +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Judith Arlene Anderson

Petitioner (respondent Below)

Stephen Richard Anderson

Respondent (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Law Child Support/maintenance) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether arrears of child support can be cancelled for non‑enforcement and delay
  2. 2 Whether a payor's obligations to a new family constitute a change of circumstances justifying reduction of child support
  3. 3 Whether the Federal Child Support Guidelines and s.10(3) permit deviation where payor's household would remain better off

Ratio Decidendi

Arrears cannot be cancelled absent demonstration of prejudice, serious hardship or unfairness caused by delay; the father's unilateral failure to pay did not excuse him. The Federal Child Support Guidelines determine future payments and, although new family obligations are a relevant factor, s.10(3) bars reduction where the payor's household would remain better off after guideline payments. On the facts the father's household would remain better off, so the Chambers judge correctly ordered guideline support and refused to cancel arrears.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Application to cancel arrears dismissed; arrears of $24,075 remain owing