Canada Case Law

A.M. v. I.V.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court concluded that the fairest determination was to include the Claimant Corporation's pre-tax income (with quantified add-backs for personal expenses) in the claimant's income and to average the relevant years under s.17 given fluctuation; it rejected imputation of additional income for 2023-24 due to demonstrated downturn, accepted specified add-backs to corporate income, determined the parties' Guidelines incomes (claimant $67,306 for each year; respondent $54,887 for 2023 and $80,801 for 2024), retroactively varied the Consent Order to reflect adjusted set-offs for child support, an…

Source excerpt

• Section 7 expenses
• Imputation of income
• Schedule iii adjustments
• Section 18 corporate income
• Shared parenting
• Retroactive variation

Read case analysis

Pollard v. Pollard

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Family law trial on property division, child support, spousal support, and conduct. The court adjusted the respondent’s income from his company and rental property.

• Personal services corporation
• Income attribution
• Retroactive support
• S.230 family law act fine
• Credibility findings
• Division of matrimonial property

Read case analysis

T.A.J. v L.M.T.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court imputed the claimant’s income for 2018 and 2019 by adding personal and unsupported business expenses, then varied child support retroactively under the separation agreement.

• Imputing income
• Retroactive child support
• Federal child support guidelines s.18 and s.19
• Section 7 extraordinary expenses
• Separation agreement review
• Imputing-income

Read case analysis

Dreesen v. Dreesen

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion judge did not err: the father failed to prove a material decrease for retroactive reduction; it was appropriate under s.18 CSG to add pre-tax corporate income and disallow unreasonably deducted expenses where the father controlled the corporations and provided insufficient evidence of legitimate corporate needs; averaging 2017–2019 income for ongoing support was reasonable; and step-down spousal support terminating in September 2023 reasonably balanced entitlement and transition to self-sufficiency.

Source excerpt

• Imputation of corporate pre-tax income under s.18 csg
• Material change for variation and retroactivity
• Averaging income for ongoing support
• Step-down versus termination of spousal support
• Use of affidavit evidence versus viva voce

Read case analysis

McLellan v. McLellan

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

There was a material change but there was insufficient evidence to impute corporate pre-tax income or retained earnings to the applicant under Guidelines s.18 or to impute income under s.19; the applicant’s business expenses and related-party salary were reasonable and necessary; prospective child support is calculated on annual income of $42,498 producing a table amount of $362/month plus $108/month for the child’s cell phone; no retroactive arrears are enforceable for Andrea but Maintenance Enforcement shall calculate and enforce any underpayments for Ryan dating back to the period the orde…

Source excerpt

• Variation of support
• Imputation of income under guidelines s.18 and s.19
• Retroactive support
• Maintenance enforcement
• Capitalization and schedule iii adjustments
• Reasonableness of related-party salaries

Read case analysis

Jensen v. Jensen

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Appeal in a child-support case for an adult child with disabilities. The Court reduced arrears because of a missed CLBC subsidy and a math error, but otherwise upheld the orders.

• Imputed income
• Registered disability savings plan (rdsp)
• Persons with disability benefit (pwd)
• Community living british columbia (clbc) subsidy
• Calculation of arrears
• Costs award

Read case analysis

Druchet v. Druchet

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court imputed income to both parties in a support variation application, setting the respondent at $200,000 and the claimant at $22,500, with support retroactive to September 1, 2015.

• Income imputation
• Retroactive support
• Consent order variation
• Application of federal child support guidelines s.18
• Income-imputation
• Retroactive-support

Read case analysis

Pereverzoff v. Pereverzoff

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court reviewed income for support, imputed income to the claimant, and recalculated child and spousal support from January 1, 2015, while rejecting RESP claims as extraordinary expenses.

• Review vs variation of support orders
• Imputation of income
• Federal child support guidelines ss.18-19
• Retroactive support
• Resp treatment
• Consultation for s.7 expenses

Read case analysis

Clarke v. Clarke

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Family support variation case: spousal support was reduced, child support increased retroactively, and vague extracurricular expense language was replaced with s. 7 Guidelines wording.

• Section 17 variation
• Imputed income
• Spousal support advisory guidelines
• Child support guidelines s.7
• Special and extraordinary expenses
• Retroactive child support

Read case analysis

Stevens v. Stevens

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court imputed corporate benefits and pre-tax profits to the respondent’s income, set prospective child support for Dakota, and ordered limited retroactive support.

• Imputation of income
• Attribution of pre-tax corporate profits
• Averaging income under guidelines s.17
• Retroactive child support
• Non-monetary benefits inclusion
• Imputation-of-income

Read case analysis