W.C.X. v. C.M.C.

W.C.X. v. C.M.C.

Applicant failed to prove a material change in Mr. X's income since the prior trial and Court of Appeal adjustment; explanations for increased gross sales (business expansion, showroom, change in cash usage, and Ms. H's separate funds) were accepted as reasonable, so imputed income remains at the Court of Appeal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2021 BCSC 1438
Parties
Claimant: W.C.X. aka W.X.; Respondent: C.M.C. aka C.C.; Respondents by Counterclaim: Y.H.H. aka Y.H and FFL
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Family Law (child Support, Spousal Support, Property Enforcement) / Post‑trial Applications / Enforcement Trial (five‑day Hearing on Applications)
Outcome
Applications partially dismissed and partially granted: variation of imputed income dismissed; award of past special expenses granted; parenting‑time fines/compensation dismissed; funds in court largely released to claimant except amount retained for special expenses; ancillary parenting contact and procedural...
Legal Topics
Income Imputation, Special Expenses (s.7), Parenting Time Enforcement, Funds Held in Court, Document Disclosure, Contempt, Parens Patriae
Source Language
english
Family Law Child Support Spousal Support Property Law Enforcement Income Imputation Special Expenses (s.7) Parenting Time Enforcement +4 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W.C.X. aka W.X.

Claimant

C.M.C. aka C.C.

Respondent

Y.H.H. aka Y.H and FFL

Respondents by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Family Law (child Support, Spousal Support, Property Enforcement) / Post‑trial Applications / Enforcement Trial (five‑day Hearing on Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there has been a material change in Mr. X's income justifying increased imputed income since 2019
  2. 2 Whether claimed special (s.7) expenses are necessary, reasonable and extraordinary and payable proportionately
  3. 3 Whether Mr. X should be fined or ordered to compensate for alleged failures to exercise parenting time

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to prove a material change in Mr. X's income since the prior trial and Court of Appeal adjustment; explanations for increased gross sales (business expansion, showroom, change in cash usage, and Ms. H's separate funds) were accepted as reasonable, so imputed income remains at the Court of Appeal level ($67,200). Ms. C proved a portion of past special s.7 expenses (total $10,700) which are payable proportionately; there is no basis for a fine or compensation against Mr. X for parenting time, and the court ordered release of the funds in court to Mr. X's counsel except $10,700 retained for special expenses, subject to parenting‑time compliance and further directions.

Court Disposition

Applications partially dismissed and partially granted: variation of imputed income dismissed; award of past special expenses granted; parenting‑time fines/compensation dismissed; funds in court largely released to claimant except amount retained for special expenses; ancillary parenting contact and procedural...

Orders

  • Ms. C's application to vary Mr. X's imputed income dismissed
  • Ms. C awarded $10,700 for past special expenses (s.7), payable proportionately; this sum to be paid from funds held in court