The court found the adult child remained a child of the marriage, but reduced support to $750 monthly and imposed shared tuition and counselling costs.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of SSHRCâs denial of a post-doctoral fellowship, finding no legitimate expectation of detailed feedback and no procedural unfairness.
The court found attendance at Landmark East was necessary for Emily's best interests and constituted an extraordinary expense under s.7(1.1); the expense was reasonable relative to the parties' means; however, retroactive equal sharing for 2010/2011 would be unfair because Carolyn acted unilaterally and delayed the claim, so a limited retroactive order was made and ongoing costs will be shared 50/50 subject to verification; health expenses were not proven to exceed insurer reimbursement and thus no immediate sharing order was made but, if shown to exceed insurance, they will be shared equally.
Court held that a portion of the 2005 child support windfall was held by the Applicant under a fiduciary obligation for the children's benefit and that approximately $45,000 of the windfall (including a $21,000 educational fund and $24,000 budgeted for Applicant's dental work) must be treated as available for the children's special/extraordinary postâsecondary expenses; parties must deduct available funds (child contribution, USC, RESP, educational fund, dental allocation) from the eldest child's $14,318 firstâyear budget and share any remaining deficit proportionally (65:35 based on incomes)âŚ
Court fixed post-secondary child support for an adult child at university, allowed limited retroactive variation, and apportioned expenses based on income and need.
Courted varies child support under the Guidelines, dismisses the respondentâs request to reduce spousal maintenance, and reallocates certain extraordinary child expenses.