Mark v. Mark

Mark v. Mark

The respondent demonstrated a sufficient reduction in guideline income since the Consent Order to warrant an interim variation; the court imputed the respondent's guideline income at $100000 as of the hearing date pending the full review because the respondent did not provide adequate documentary evidence or proof...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2017 BCSC 2405
Parties
Claimant: Heidi Maria Mark; Respondent: Carl Robert Mark
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Family Law Support (divorce Act) / Interim Application and Cross Applications; Review Pending
Outcome
Interim order varying Consent Order: respondent's guideline income imputed at $100000 as of the date of the hearing; claimants remains imputed at zero; matter set for review; respondent ordered to produce financial disclosure; claimant awarded costs.
Legal Topics
Variation of Support, Imputation of Income, Material Change in Circumstances, Disclosure of Remuneration, Special and Extraordinary Expenses
Source Language
english
Family Law Spousal Support Child Support Consent Order Variation Disclosure/enforcement Variation of Support Imputation of Income Material Change in Circumstances +2 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Heidi Maria Mark

Claimant

Carl Robert Mark

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Support (divorce Act) / Interim Application and Cross Applications; Review Pending

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent demonstrated a material change in circumstances to vary the Consent Order
  2. 2 Whether respondent's income should be imputed and at what amount
  3. 3 Whether respondent must continue to pay special and extraordinary expenses under the Consent Order

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent demonstrated a sufficient reduction in guideline income since the Consent Order to warrant an interim variation; the court imputed the respondent's guideline income at $100000 as of the hearing date pending the full review because the respondent did not provide adequate documentary evidence or proof of sustained job search and the claimant remains at zero income; parties must provide evidence of income-earning efforts for the final review; special and extraordinary expenses are reserved to the reviewing judge.

Court Disposition

Interim order varying Consent Order: respondent's guideline income imputed at $100000 as of the date of the hearing; claimants remains imputed at zero; matter set for review; respondent ordered to produce financial disclosure; claimant awarded costs.

Orders

  • Interim variation of the Consent Order: respondent's guideline income imputed at $100000 as of the date of the hearing
  • Claimant's guideline income remains at zero pending review