A.R.A. v. J.S.

A.R.A. v. J.S.

Court found two material changes: the mother's reduced earning capacity after moving and bearing a fifth child, and that the father’s actual paid access costs were less than guideline child support such that the Ontario agreement implicitly traded support for access costs; the court included child tax and GST benefits in the standard of living comparison, declined to impute income to the mother, applied s.10(2)/(3) to compare standards of living and ordered the father to pay the difference between guideline support and reasonable access costs (annualized), resulting in $295/month commencing September 1, 2003, with annual recalculation based on prior year income less reasonable paid travel...

Citation
2003 BCSC 1245
Parties
Plaintiff (mother): A.R.A.; Defendant (father): J.S.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Support and Relocation / Application for Variation of Child Support (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Application granted in part; support varied
Legal Topics
Variation of Child Support, Access Costs Offsets, Child Support Guidelines S.10, Standard of Living Comparison, Imputation of Income
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Relocation/access Variation of Child Support Access Costs Offsets Child Support Guidelines S.10 Standard of Living Comparison Imputation of Income

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A.R.A.

Plaintiff (mother)

J.S.

Defendant (father)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Support and Relocation / Application for Variation of Child Support (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there has been a material change in circumstances warranting variation of child support
  2. 2 Whether the father's access costs justify reduction of guideline child support under s.10(2) of the Federal Child Support Guidelines
  3. 3 Whether child tax benefits and GST credits should be included in a standard of living comparison under Schedule II

Ratio Decidendi

Court found two material changes: the mother's reduced earning capacity after moving and bearing a fifth child, and that the father’s actual paid access costs were less than guideline child support such that the Ontario agreement implicitly traded support for access costs; the court included child tax and GST benefits in the standard of living comparison, declined to impute income to the mother, applied s.10(2)/(3) to compare standards of living and ordered the father to pay the difference between guideline support and reasonable access costs (annualized), resulting in $295/month commencing September 1, 2003, with annual recalculation based on prior year income less reasonable paid travel...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; support varied

Orders

  • Father to pay child support of $295 per month commencing September 1, 2003
  • Child support to be recalculated annually: father's otherwise applicable child support (based on prior year line 150 on notice of assessment) less reasonable paid travel expenses for the period (yearly)