Connelly v. McGouran

Connelly v. McGouran

The Court of Appeal allowed the mother's cross-appeal, set aside the limited retroactive award, and remitted for a new hearing because the application judge underweighted the father's blameworthy conduct (failure to disclose, breach of orders and contempt) and overemphasized speculative hardship; per the Supreme Court in D.B.S., blameworthy payor conduct strongly favors substantial retroactive awards and the matter must be re-assessed with proper application of those principles.

Citation
2007 ONCA 578
Parties
Appellant (respondent in Cross Appeal): Stephen Francis Connelly; Respondent (appellant in Cross Appeal): Ann Marie (Annie) McGouran
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Support Appeal and Cross Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision Remitting Cross Appeal for New Hearing
Outcome
Cross-appeal allowed; decision of application judge on cross-appeal set aside; matter remitted for a new hearing; costs of cross-appeal awarded to the mother
Legal Topics
Retroactive Child Support, Federal Child Support Guidelines, Income Disclosure, Contempt, Undue Hardship, Conversion of Foreign Income
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Appeal Retroactive Child Support Federal Child Support Guidelines Income Disclosure Contempt Undue Hardship +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Francis Connelly

Appellant (respondent in Cross Appeal)

Ann Marie (Annie) McGouran

Respondent (appellant in Cross Appeal)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Support Appeal and Cross Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision Remitting Cross Appeal for New Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application judge erred in applying the D.B.S. v. S.R.G. factors for retroactive child support
  2. 2 Whether retroactive child support should extend to the date of the father's income increase (August 2000) given nondisclosure and contempt
  3. 3 Whether the higher cost of living in the U.K. should reduce the table amount under the Guidelines

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal allowed the mother's cross-appeal, set aside the limited retroactive award, and remitted for a new hearing because the application judge underweighted the father's blameworthy conduct (failure to disclose, breach of orders and contempt) and overemphasized speculative hardship; per the Supreme Court in D.B.S., blameworthy payor conduct strongly favors substantial retroactive awards and the matter must be re-assessed with proper application of those principles.

Court Disposition

Cross-appeal allowed; decision of application judge on cross-appeal set aside; matter remitted for a new hearing; costs of cross-appeal awarded to the mother

Orders

  • Set aside application judge's retroactive award and order a new hearing on retroactivity
  • Costs of the cross-appeal awarded to the mother in the amount of $2,500