Pedersen v. Pedersen

Pedersen v. Pedersen

The application to terminate or reduce spousal support for cohabitation was dismissed because the 2010 order was substantially compensatory and cohabitation did not warrant disturbance; however the applicant's unforeseen termination/unemployment constituted a materially changed circumstance for recalculation purposes, so support and arrears are to be recalculated using actual incomes from 2011 onward, crediting payments made after mid‑2011, and FMEP is to be advised of the revised figures to compute arrears and interest.

Citation
2013 BCSC 833
Parties
Claimant: Nicole Lee Pedersen; Respondent: Christopher Thomas Pedersen
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Family Law Application to Vary Child and Spousal Support (divorce Act) / Reasons for Judgment on Variation Application
Outcome
Application to vary spousal support based on respondent's cohabitation dismissed; application granted in part to recalculate support and arrears based on applicant's unforeseen unemployment and subsequent incomes.
Legal Topics
Variation of Support Orders, Material Change of Circumstances, Cohabitation/re‑partnering, Compensatory Spousal Support, Calculation of Arrears
Source Language
English
Family Law Divorce Spousal Support Child Support Variation of Support Orders Material Change of Circumstances Cohabitation/re‑partnering Compensatory Spousal Support +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicole Lee Pedersen

Claimant

Christopher Thomas Pedersen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Application to Vary Child and Spousal Support (divorce Act) / Reasons for Judgment on Variation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there has been a material change of circumstances warranting retroactive variation of child and spousal support orders
  2. 2 Whether the recipient's cohabitation/engagement with a new partner justifies termination or reduction of spousal support given a compensatory award
  3. 3 How to calculate support and arrears consistent with the court's order (use prior year's line 150 income and June 1 adjustments)

Ratio Decidendi

The application to terminate or reduce spousal support for cohabitation was dismissed because the 2010 order was substantially compensatory and cohabitation did not warrant disturbance; however the applicant's unforeseen termination/unemployment constituted a materially changed circumstance for recalculation purposes, so support and arrears are to be recalculated using actual incomes from 2011 onward, crediting payments made after mid‑2011, and FMEP is to be advised of the revised figures to compute arrears and interest.

Court Disposition

Application to vary spousal support based on respondent's cohabitation dismissed; application granted in part to recalculate support and arrears based on applicant's unforeseen unemployment and subsequent incomes.

Orders

  • Spousal support obligation not disturbed on the basis of cohabitation or engagement
  • Support calculations to be re‑made using the court's ordered process (previous year's line 150 income applied to the following year) with applicant's 2011 and subsequent income used for both child and spousal support calculations