Pinder v. Pinder

Pinder v. Pinder

The trial judge's factual finding of income parity was palpably wrong; pension income must be included in the payor's income for spousal support absent evidence of double recovery or a pension 'buy-out', there was no such evidence here, the fresh documentary evidence (tax returns and pension documentation) was properly admitted and showed the respondent's income materially exceeded the appellant's, and on that basis the Court allowed the appeal and varied the spousal support from $1,500 to $1,000 per month effective October 1, 2007 (with no interest on arrears prior to the date of the order).

Citation
2010 BCCA 235
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Karin Janice Pinder; Respondent (defendant): George Ceifert Pinder
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Family Law Spousal Support Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of British Columbia Decision on Application to Cancel/variation of Spousal Support
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; impugned order cancelling spousal support and arrears set aside; original order varied to reduce spousal support to $1,000 per month effective October 1, 2007; fresh evidence admitted
Legal Topics
Variation of Support, Double Recovery, Admission of Fresh Evidence, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, Standard of Review on Appeal
Source Language
English
Family Law Spousal Support Pension Law Property Division Civil Procedure Variation of Support Double Recovery Admission of Fresh Evidence +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karin Janice Pinder

Appellant (plaintiff)

George Ceifert Pinder

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Spousal Support Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of British Columbia Decision on Application to Cancel/variation of Spousal Support

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in finding the parties' incomes were virtually the same and cancelling spousal support and arrears
  2. 2 Whether pension income must be excluded from income for spousal support calculations under Boston v. Boston due to double recovery
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence (tax returns and pension documentation) should be admitted on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's factual finding of income parity was palpably wrong; pension income must be included in the payor's income for spousal support absent evidence of double recovery or a pension 'buy-out', there was no such evidence here, the fresh documentary evidence (tax returns and pension documentation) was properly admitted and showed the respondent's income materially exceeded the appellant's, and on that basis the Court allowed the appeal and varied the spousal support from $1,500 to $1,000 per month effective October 1, 2007 (with no interest on arrears prior to the date of the order).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; impugned order cancelling spousal support and arrears set aside; original order varied to reduce spousal support to $1,000 per month effective October 1, 2007; fresh evidence admitted

Orders

  • Set aside the January 8, 2008 order cancelling the spousal support order and arrears
  • Admit the fresh evidence (tax returns and pension documentation)