C.M. v. P.M

C.M. v. P.M

Court began with s.16 line 150 income, applied s.18 and found scenario B (partial add‑backs and limited disallowance of certain corporate deductions) best represented income given disclosure; payor failed to prove that pre-tax corporate income was unavailable, so court exercised discretion to attribute corporate income after considering corporate expenses, debt repayments and retained earnings; on that basis court increased prospective and retroactive table child support and ordered proportionate sharing of certain s.7 extraordinary extracurricular and post‑secondary expenses.

Citation
2019 NSSC 250
Parties
Applicant: C.M.; Respondent: P.M.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Divorce Act Variation Application Child Support (family Division) / Trial Decision / Written Judgment
Outcome
Court ordered Mr. M to pay increased prospective and retroactive child support and specified proportionate s.7 amounts after attributing corporate income under s.18 (scenario B) and finding the payor failed to satisfy the onus of unavailability of pre-tax corporate income.
Legal Topics
Income Determination (s.16), Corporate Attribution (s.18), Prospective Child Support (s.3), Retroactive Child Support, Special or Extraordinary Expenses (s.7), Disclosure Obligations (s.21 25), Retroactivity Principles (s.(d.b.) V. G.)
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Divorce Act Federal Child Support Guidelines Corporate Attribution Income Determination (s.16) Corporate Attribution (s.18) Prospective Child Support (s.3) +4 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C.M.

Applicant

P.M.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Act Variation Application Child Support (family Division) / Trial Decision / Written Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What was the payor's annual income for child support for 2011-2019?
  2. 2 Whether pre-tax corporate income should be attributed to the payor under s.18 and if so in what amount
  3. 3 Whether prospective and retroactive table child support under s.3 should be increased and from what dates

Ratio Decidendi

Court began with s.16 line 150 income, applied s.18 and found scenario B (partial add‑backs and limited disallowance of certain corporate deductions) best represented income given disclosure; payor failed to prove that pre-tax corporate income was unavailable, so court exercised discretion to attribute corporate income after considering corporate expenses, debt repayments and retained earnings; on that basis court increased prospective and retroactive table child support and ordered proportionate sharing of certain s.7 extraordinary extracurricular and post‑secondary expenses.

Court Disposition

Court ordered Mr. M to pay increased prospective and retroactive child support and specified proportionate s.7 amounts after attributing corporate income under s.18 (scenario B) and finding the payor failed to satisfy the onus of unavailability of pre-tax corporate income.

Orders

  • Prospective child support pursuant to s.3: October–December 2015 $928.83; 2016 $7,518.60; 2017 $2,743.32; January–August 2018 $20,520.00; September 2018–February 2019 $12,333.00; total $44,043.75.
  • Prospective child support pursuant to s.7: 2017 $234.51; 2018 $211.11; total $545.62; parties to account for J’s 2018/2019 post‑secondary expenses as detailed in judgment.