Kerman v. Kerman

Kerman v. Kerman

The claimant failed to meet the onus to prove a material change in circumstances of a continuing nature: the respondent's 2008 earnings were an unexpected anomaly and subsequent earnings align with the original prediction, the claimant did not demonstrate steps toward self-sufficiency or an unexpected impediment to employment, and the respondent's new partner's assets do not constitute a material change in the payor's circumstances; therefore no variation of spousal support is warranted.

Citation
2014 BCSC 428
Parties
Claimant: Laura Candice Kerman; Respondent: Ralph Cunningham Kerman
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Spousal Support Variation Under Divorce Act / Application for Variation Dismissed at Hearing
Outcome
Claimant's application for increased spousal support for January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2013 is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Variation of Support, Material Change of Circumstances, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, Onus of Proof
Source Language
English
Family Law Spousal Support Divorce Act Variation of Support Material Change of Circumstances Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines Onus of Proof

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Laura Candice Kerman

Claimant

Ralph Cunningham Kerman

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Spousal Support Variation Under Divorce Act / Application for Variation Dismissed at Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there has been a material change in circumstances warranting variation of spousal support
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's anomalous 2008 income justifies retrospective variation
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's cohabitation and partner's assets constitute a material change

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to meet the onus to prove a material change in circumstances of a continuing nature: the respondent's 2008 earnings were an unexpected anomaly and subsequent earnings align with the original prediction, the claimant did not demonstrate steps toward self-sufficiency or an unexpected impediment to employment, and the respondent's new partner's assets do not constitute a material change in the payor's circumstances; therefore no variation of spousal support is warranted.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for increased spousal support for January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2013 is dismissed.

Orders

  • Application dismissed; no variation of the existing spousal support order granted
  • If parties cannot agree, they may address costs; if required a one‑hour costs hearing at 9:00 a.m. to be scheduled within 90 days through Trial Scheduling