Berry v. Hart

Berry v. Hart

Majority held that application of s.9 is a matter of judgment assessed in context and not dependent on slavish hour‑by‑hour accounting; on the facts the chambers judge did not err in principle or exercise of discretion in refusing to reduce child support and the appeal is dismissed, affirming the variation that resulted in $1,576 per month support.

Citation
2003 BCCA 659
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Trevor Donald Berry; Respondent/defendant: Suzanne Elizabeth Hart
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal Family/child Support / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; chambers judge's order affirmed
Legal Topics
Shared Custody, Federal Child Support Guidelines S.9, Time‑sharing Threshold, Apportionment of Child Support, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Support Custody and Access Divorce Act Interpretation Shared Custody Federal Child Support Guidelines S.9 Time‑sharing Threshold Apportionment of Child Support +1 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trevor Donald Berry

Appellant/plaintiff

Suzanne Elizabeth Hart

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal Family/child Support / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.9 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines applies when a parent has the children "not less than 40%" of the time or whether a broader contextual assessment is permitted
  2. 2 Whether a paying parent may reduce or withhold guideline table support proportionate to the time children spend with that parent absent s.9 relief
  3. 3 What degree of exactitude in time accounting is required to trigger s.9

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that application of s.9 is a matter of judgment assessed in context and not dependent on slavish hour‑by‑hour accounting; on the facts the chambers judge did not err in principle or exercise of discretion in refusing to reduce child support and the appeal is dismissed, affirming the variation that resulted in $1,576 per month support.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; chambers judge's order affirmed

Orders

  • Chambers judge's variation of child support to $1,576 per month for the four children affirmed