Murphy v. Murphy

Murphy v. Murphy

The chambers judge erred in principle by cancelling spousal support without applying the s.17(7) factors and by selecting a termination date as a compromise; and erred in imputing a lower income for child support where the applicant failed to make full disclosure and credibility findings did not support lowering the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2007 BCCA 500
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Teresita S. Murphy; Respondent / Defendant: Anthony Blaine Murphy
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Chambers Judgment Re Variation of Support Orders / Court of Appeal Decision Remitting Matter for Rehearing Limited to Spousal Support
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part. Variation of child support dismissed. Paragraphs 1(a) to (d) of the chambers order set aside. Matter remitted to Supreme Court for rehearing limited to spousal support. Costs awarded to the appellant in this Court.
Legal Topics
Variation of Support, Imputed Income, Change of Circumstances, Disclosure and Burden of Proof, Cohabitation/common‑law Impact, Arrears
Source Language
english
Family Law Divorce Spousal Support Child Support Procedural Law Variation of Support Imputed Income Change of Circumstances +3 more

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Teresita S. Murphy

Appellant / Plaintiff

Anthony Blaine Murphy

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Chambers Judgment Re Variation of Support Orders / Court of Appeal Decision Remitting Matter for Rehearing Limited to Spousal Support

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the chambers judge erred in finding the wife's changed circumstances justified cancelling spousal support as of January 1, 2004
  2. 2 Whether the chambers judge erred in reducing the imputed income for the father's child support from $40,000 to $35,000 as of January 1, 2003
  3. 3 Whether the applicant met the burden of full financial disclosure required to establish a variation in child support

Ratio Decidendi

The chambers judge erred in principle by cancelling spousal support without applying the s.17(7) factors and by selecting a termination date as a compromise; and erred in imputing a lower income for child support where the applicant failed to make full disclosure and credibility findings did not support lowering the previously imputed $40,000. Appeal allowed in part: child support variation dismissed, spousal support issue remitted for rehearing with liberty to file additional material.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part. Variation of child support dismissed. Paragraphs 1(a) to (d) of the chambers order set aside. Matter remitted to Supreme Court for rehearing limited to spousal support. Costs awarded to the appellant in this Court.

Orders

  • Dismissed the respondent's (applicant's) application to vary child support
  • Set aside paragraphs 1(a) to (d) of the chambers order (2007 BCSC 510)