D.M.H.P. v. R.J.C.P.

D.M.H.P. v. R.J.C.P.

The father's evidence established a material but time‑limited reduction in income earning capacity from July 30, 2010 to December 31, 2011 warranting a retroactive variation based on imputed income of $84,000 (reducing arrears by $14,980); however the father failed to meet the heavy burden to cancel or further reduce remaining child or spousal arrears and did not prove ongoing incapacity to pay; the mother failed to discharge her onus to prove the two eldest remained 'children of the marriage'; insufficient evidence supported increasing imputed income to $150,000; inadmissible or unreliable affidavit/investigation material was disregarded and mental health evidence did not establish...

Citation
2018 BCSC 1755
Parties
Claimant (mother): D.M.H.P.; Respondent (father): R.J.C.P. (also known as R.C.P.)
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child and Spousal Support Variation and Enforcement / Application Hearing and Reasons for Judgment on Competing Applications
Outcome
Father's application allowed in part; mother's application to increase imputed income dismissed; parties to bear their own costs.
Legal Topics
Retroactive Variation of Support, Cancellation/reduction of Arrears, Children of the Marriage Under Divorce Act, Guidelines Income Imputation S.19, FLA Ss.152 and 174, D.b.s. Factors, Affidavit Admissibility and Hearsay
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Spousal Support Income Imputation Custody and Access Evidence Admissibility Retroactive Variation of Support Cancellation/reduction of Arrears +5 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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.M.H.P.

Claimant (mother)

R.J.C.P. (also known as R.C.P.)

Respondent (father)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child and Spousal Support Variation and Enforcement / Application Hearing and Reasons for Judgment on Competing Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether child support arrears should be retroactively varied under FLA s.152
  2. 2 Whether arrears of child and spousal support should be reduced or cancelled under FLA s.174
  3. 3 Whether the two eldest children remain "children of the marriage" for support purposes under Divorce Act s.2(1)

Ratio Decidendi

The father's evidence established a material but time‑limited reduction in income earning capacity from July 30, 2010 to December 31, 2011 warranting a retroactive variation based on imputed income of $84,000 (reducing arrears by $14,980); however the father failed to meet the heavy burden to cancel or further reduce remaining child or spousal arrears and did not prove ongoing incapacity to pay; the mother failed to discharge her onus to prove the two eldest remained 'children of the marriage'; insufficient evidence supported increasing imputed income to $150,000; inadmissible or unreliable affidavit/investigation material was disregarded and mental health evidence did not establish...

Court Disposition

Father's application allowed in part; mother's application to increase imputed income dismissed; parties to bear their own costs.

Orders

  • Retroactive variation of child support for period July 30, 2010 to December 31, 2011 based on imputed income of $84,000 resulting in reduction of child support arrears by $14,980
  • Father's applications to cancel or reduce the remaining child support arrears dismissed