R.P. v. R.C.

R.P. v. R.C.

The appeal is allowed because the husband failed to meet the statutory evidentiary burden under s.17(4.1) of the Divorce Act: the record lacked evidence of his financial circumstances at the time of the 1991 Order and lacked proof that the 2008 market decline resulted in crystallized, continuous loss; without that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2011 SCC 65
Parties
Appellant: R.P.; Respondent: R.C.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Quebec Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; variation set aside; 1991 indexed spousal support order restored; costs awarded to appellant throughout.
Legal Topics
Spousal Support, Variation of Support, Material Change in Circumstances, Evidentiary Burden, Fresh Evidence
Source Language
english
Family Law Civil Procedure Evidence Spousal Support Variation of Support Material Change in Circumstances Evidentiary Burden Fresh Evidence

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.P.

Appellant

R.C.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Quebec Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the husband established a material change in circumstances since the 1991 spousal support order
  2. 2 Whether the husband met his evidentiary burden to prove his financial circumstances at the time of the original order and at the time of variation
  3. 3 Whether market downturn and retirement, without evidence of crystallized losses or continuity, suffice for variation

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed because the husband failed to meet the statutory evidentiary burden under s.17(4.1) of the Divorce Act: the record lacked evidence of his financial circumstances at the time of the 1991 Order and lacked proof that the 2008 market decline resulted in crystallized, continuous loss; without that evidence a material change could not be established and the variation could not be upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; variation set aside; 1991 indexed spousal support order restored; costs awarded to appellant throughout.

Orders

  • Restore the indexed spousal support under the 1991 Court of Appeal order effective retroactively to the date it was varied by the trial court
  • Dismiss the respondent's application to vary the 1991 Order