James v. James

James v. James

Appellate court concluded the chambers judge properly found the respondent had substantially increased income in 2004-2006 and that funds declared as bonuses/dividends were available to him; the appellant demonstrated a continuing need to maintain a lifestyle not dramatically different from the marriage and was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2009 BCCA 261
Parties
Appellant (defendant): Lynn Anne James; Respondent (plaintiff): Craig Anthony James
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal Spousal and Child Support / Appeal to Court of Appeal (judgment)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; child and spousal support varied; certain chambers judge orders set aside; costs awarded to appellant
Legal Topics
Variation of Support, Retroactive Support, Income Attribution and Characterization, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines (ssag) Application, Child Support Guidelines S.4
Source Language
english
Family Law Spousal Support Child Support Civil Appeal Variation of Support Retroactive Support Income Attribution and Characterization Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines (ssag) Application +1 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lynn Anne James

Appellant (defendant)

Craig Anthony James

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal Spousal and Child Support / Appeal to Court of Appeal (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent's corporate bonuses/dividends/withdrawals constituted income for support purposes (2004-2006)
  2. 2 Whether retroactive child support should be increased and for what period
  3. 3 Whether retroactive spousal support should be increased and quantum

Ratio Decidendi

Appellate court concluded the chambers judge properly found the respondent had substantially increased income in 2004-2006 and that funds declared as bonuses/dividends were available to him; the appellant demonstrated a continuing need to maintain a lifestyle not dramatically different from the marriage and was unlikely to obtain high paid employment; balancing respondent's ability to pay and appellant's need, the court varied spousal support to $9,000/month retroactive to January 1, 2005, extended the chambers judge's child support variation back to April 1, 2004 (fixed at $6,000/month with credits for prior payments and recreational amounts), ordered a lump sum $15,000 for unpaid...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; child and spousal support varied; certain chambers judge orders set aside; costs awarded to appellant

Orders

  • Spousal support varied to $9,000 per month retroactive to January 1, 2005
  • Child support varied to $6,000 per month for the period April 1, 2004 to March 25, 2006 with credit to respondent for $3,000 monthly payments and $1,000 monthly recreational expenses as previously paid