B.(T.K.) v. S.(P.M.)

B.(T.K.) v. S.(P.M.)

Court found respondent had financial means and engaged in conduct that avoided regular child support; applicant's delay was justified by fear and limited resources; court ordered respondent to pay his 60% share of 2007/2008 s.7 expenses ($8,451) without requiring retroactive contribution from N.; ordered retroactive...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2008 BCSC 1350
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff: T.K.B.; Respondent/defendant: P.M.S.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Support (federal Child Support Guidelines) / Application Hearing Reasons for Judgment (s.7 Expense and Retroactive Support Application)
Outcome
Application granted in part: respondent ordered to pay specified s.7 post-secondary expense share and retroactive child support arrears; other retroactive months for 2008 not ordered.
Legal Topics
Section 7(1)(e) Expenses, Retroactive Child Support, Contribution of Adult Child to Post Secondary Expenses, Delay and Justifiable Excuse (d.b.s. Factors), Calculation Using Guidelines Table
Source Language
english
Family Law Child Support Administrative/application of Federal Child Support Guidelines Section 7(1)(e) Expenses Retroactive Child Support Contribution of Adult Child to Post Secondary Expenses Delay and Justifiable Excuse (d.b.s. Factors) Calculation Using Guidelines Table

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T.K.B.

Applicant/plaintiff

P.M.S.

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Support (federal Child Support Guidelines) / Application Hearing Reasons for Judgment (s.7 Expense and Retroactive Support Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent must pay section 7(1)(e) post-secondary expenses for 2007/2008 and quantum
  2. 2 Whether child N. should be required to contribute from past earnings to 2007/2008 expenses
  3. 3 Whether retroactive child support is payable for Jan 1, 2005 to Aug 31, 2006 and May–Aug 2007 and quantum

Ratio Decidendi

Court found respondent had financial means and engaged in conduct that avoided regular child support; applicant's delay was justified by fear and limited resources; court ordered respondent to pay his 60% share of 2007/2008 s.7 expenses ($8,451) without requiring retroactive contribution from N.; ordered retroactive child support arrears of $13,860.10 for Jan–Dec 2005, Jan–Aug 2006, and May–Aug 2007 after deducting respondent's direct payments and child contribution; recommended future child contribution of 25% of annual income but left it non-binding for 2007/08.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part: respondent ordered to pay specified s.7 post-secondary expense share and retroactive child support arrears; other retroactive months for 2008 not ordered.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay $8,451 to cover his 60% share of N.'s 2007/2008 post-secondary educational expenses forthwith (no contribution from N.)
  • Respondent to pay $13,860.10 to applicant as retroactive child support arrears for Jan–Dec 2005, Jan–Aug 2006 and May–Aug 2007 (accounting for respondent's prior direct payments and N.'s contribution)