L.E.M. v. D.M.I.

L.E.M. v. D.M.I.

The son remains a child of the marriage by reason of disability so s.3(2)(b) applies; child support is to be calculated by determining reasonable costs, deducting the son's disability income ($1,366/month) and dividing any shortfall between the parties (their incomes are effectively equal); the respondent's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2019 BCSC 796
Parties
Claimant: L.E.M.; Respondent: D.M.I.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Support Application (variation) / Application for Variation Under S.17 of the Divorce Act
Outcome
Application granted in part; prior 2013 and 2014 orders varied and directions given for calculation and administration of child support and extraordinary expenses
Legal Topics
S.3(2)(b) CSG, Extraordinary Expenses (s.7), Child of the Marriage (disability), Variation of Prior Orders, Allocation of Costs and Enforcement
Source Language
english
Family Law Child Support Divorce Act Child Support Guidelines S.3(2)(b) CSG Extraordinary Expenses (s.7) Child of the Marriage (disability) Variation of Prior Orders +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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L.E.M.

Claimant

D.M.I.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Support Application (variation) / Application for Variation Under S.17 of the Divorce Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adult autistic son remains a child of the marriage and child support is payable
  2. 2 Appropriate method to calculate child support under s.3(2)(b) of the Child Support Guidelines
  3. 3 Treatment of disability income and deduction from reasonable costs

Ratio Decidendi

The son remains a child of the marriage by reason of disability so s.3(2)(b) applies; child support is to be calculated by determining reasonable costs, deducting the son's disability income ($1,366/month) and dividing any shortfall between the parties (their incomes are effectively equal); the respondent's submissions that the son is higher functioning lacked evidence and were dismissed; parenting time below 40% does not reduce child support; child support and extraordinary expenses should be separated and a certified monthly budget is to be prepared by the Registrar under Rule 18-1(2); permanent e-transfer payments and annual income disclosure are ordered.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; prior 2013 and 2014 orders varied and directions given for calculation and administration of child support and extraordinary expenses

Orders

  • Respondent to pay child support and extraordinary expenses as varied; 2013 and 2014 orders varied to reflect this judgment and Registrar certification
  • Registrar directed under Supreme Court Family Rules R.18-1(2) to certify a detailed monthly budget separating child support and extraordinary expenses; parties to attend a pre-hearing conference before the Registrar