McLeod v. McLeod

McLeod v. McLeod

Because the shared-parenting arrangement ended in spring/summer 2008 and the respondent failed to disclose or contest evidence of employment in Hong Kong, the court drew an adverse inference as to his income and applied the Federal Child Support Guidelines to calculate retroactive and ongoing child support and ordered s.7 contribution for the son; spousal support was not determined because it was not properly pleaded and lacked evidentiary foundation; divorce was denied pending resolution of support; costs awarded for non-disclosure.

Citation
2011 BCSC 343
Parties
Claimant: Maryann Charlotte McLeod; Respondent: Malcolm John McLeod
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Family Law Divorce and Support / Reasons for Judgment
Outcome
Partial judgment: retroactive and ongoing child support awarded; s.7 contribution for Fabio ordered; spousal support not determined for lack of proper application; divorce denied pending resolution of support; costs awarded for non-disclosure.
Legal Topics
Retroactive Child Support, Section 7 Expenses (post Secondary), Adverse Inference for Non Disclosure, Variation Vs Review of Separation Agreement, Enforcement and Disclosure Orders
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Spousal Support Divorce Costs and Disclosure Retroactive Child Support Section 7 Expenses (post Secondary) Adverse Inference for Non Disclosure +2 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maryann Charlotte McLeod

Claimant

Malcolm John McLeod

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Divorce and Support / Reasons for Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether retroactive child support should be awarded and quantified
  2. 2 Whether respondent's overseas employment income should be imputed/determined given non-disclosure
  3. 3 Whether respondent must contribute to section 7 post-secondary expenses

Ratio Decidendi

Because the shared-parenting arrangement ended in spring/summer 2008 and the respondent failed to disclose or contest evidence of employment in Hong Kong, the court drew an adverse inference as to his income and applied the Federal Child Support Guidelines to calculate retroactive and ongoing child support and ordered s.7 contribution for the son; spousal support was not determined because it was not properly pleaded and lacked evidentiary foundation; divorce was denied pending resolution of support; costs awarded for non-disclosure.

Court Disposition

Partial judgment: retroactive and ongoing child support awarded; s.7 contribution for Fabio ordered; spousal support not determined for lack of proper application; divorce denied pending resolution of support; costs awarded for non-disclosure.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay child support arrears of 39494 payable forthwith
  • Respondent to pay ongoing monthly child support of 1308 commencing April 1, 2011 while both children remain in post-secondary education; adjust when one child ceases and annually July 1 based on prior year income