Esheria Canada Case Law
Sign in
Canada Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Canada Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Canada case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Canada decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family law 2026 BCCA 201

Faria v. Ramos

Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal was refused because the interests of justice did not favour granting leave: the order was an interim, highly discretionary 'rough justice' decision based on incomplete and contested disclosure, the proposed grounds were fact-specific and not sufficiently exceptional to justify appellate interference, and granting leave would unduly hinder progress of the underlying action.

Source excerpt

  • Imputation of income
  • Leave to appeal interim family orders
  • Primary caregiver determination
  • Interim child and spousal support
  • Closely held corporation income
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 782

Orrego v. Pearson

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

Claimant is entitled to time-limited compensatory spousal support because she sacrificed greater earning potential to work in the family restaurant and lost salary on separation; respondent's disability claim lacks causal connection and sufficient evidence and is undermined by investigator evidence, so non-compensatory support is denied; two years' duration is sufficient and a retroactive lump-sum of $22,750 (after tax-benefit discount) is appropriate; property division is resolved by transferring claimant's PRG shares and her shareholder loan to respondent, claimant retaining the TD savings…

Source excerpt

  • Compensatory spousal support
  • Non-compensatory spousal support (disability)
  • Duration of support
  • Retroactive lump-sum support
  • Division of family property
  • Shareholder loan
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 NSSC 147

Hill v. Richards

Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court retained a shared parenting regime because it is in the child's best interests given comparative evidence; imputed incomes ($25,000 for Mr. Hill from 2024, lower amounts earlier; specified incomes for Ms. Richards) justified a set-off calculation leading to prospective monthly set-off child support of $433 payable by Ms. Richards; retroactive child support was awarded based on set-off calculations and credits totaling $23,562 payable by June 15, 2026; limited spousal support $200/month for 24 months awarded to Mr. Hill based on relationship interdependence, his compromised earning c…

Source excerpt

  • Shared parenting
  • Joint family venture
  • Retroactive child support
  • Imputation of income
  • Set-off calculation
  • Maintenance enforcement
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 763

J.M.W. v. B.R.P.W.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court lacked jurisdiction under the Milman review clause and s.168 FLA to extend the duration of spousal support established at trial; the claimant failed to adduce admissible expert medical evidence to displace the imputed $30,000 income and therefore her imputed income remains; however, the respondent's substantial increase in gross (and tax-exempt) income and provision of rent-free housing constituted a material change of circumstances and nondisclosure that justified varying the quantum of child and spousal support, grossing up tax-exempt income under the Federal Guidelines and making…

Source excerpt

  • Variation and review of support orders
  • Retroactive support
  • Income gross-up for tax-exempt income
  • Imputation of income
  • Disclosure/non-disclosure
  • Admissibility of expert medical evidence
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 719

A.A.L. v. A.F.L.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that (1) relocation to Vernon by Ms. L is permitted and she will remain the primary caregiver because that arrangement best serves the children's stability and welfare given her primary caregiving role and available support; (2) a graduated parenting regime is ordered increasing Mr. L's unsupervised parenting time with specified transition periods; (3) on income the court accepted agreed imputations: Mr. L's income imputed to $192,370 (May-Dec 2024) and $239,130 (from Jan 1, 2025); Ms. L's income imputed to $65,000 up to Oct 1, 2025 and $75,000 thereafter; (4) child support and…

Source excerpt

  • Relocation
  • Parenting arrangements
  • Child support
  • Spousal support
  • Cohabitation agreement interpretation
  • Property valuation
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCCA 195

Young v. Young

Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal

Where the judge found the payor intentionally underemployed by relocating to Ecuador and restricting his earnings, it was proper to impute income based on what he could reasonably earn in Canada (assessed between $60,000–$80,000) and to impute $70,000; fresh evidence was excluded because it could have been obtained with due diligence and would not have altered the result.

Source excerpt

  • Imputation of income
  • Underemployment
  • Variation of support order
  • Fresh evidence on appeal
  • Procedural fairness
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 694

H.H.L. v. A.C.S.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

On the limited interim record and taking a cautious approach, the court imputed income of $80,000 to the claimant and $20,000 to the respondent because of inadequate disclosure, questionable corporate expense deductions and respondent's current unemployment; a straight set‑off child support calculation produced a net payment of $633/month by the claimant; respondent established a prima facie entitlement to interim compensatory/needs spousal support given loss of her share and income disparity, and interim spousal support was set at the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines mid range of $836/mon…

Source excerpt

  • Guidelines income
  • Section 7 expenses
  • Imputation of income
  • Spousal support entitlement
  • Occupancy rent
  • Interim orders
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 675

C.L.R. v. M.A.R.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

Given the respondent's continuing active addiction, limited engagement in treatment, and unstable parenting history, the court awarded all parental responsibilities to the claimant and ordered supervised parenting time with testing and progressive increase; the respondent's income was imputed at minimum wage ($37,128) because he is intentionally unemployed and capable of working, resulting in child support of $561 per month commencing May 1, 2026 and retroactive child support of $9,537 from December 1, 2024; dividends received by respondent were family property and net proceeds and specified…

Source excerpt

  • Parenting time
  • Parental responsibilities
  • Supervised parenting
  • Drug testing
  • Imputation of income
  • Retroactive child support
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 636

Loehr v. Loehr

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court imputed the respondent's 2024 Guideline income at $195,309 and his 2025 income at $180,000 (three-year average), imputed the claimant's Guideline income at $70,000, declined to grant the respondent a retroactive variation to January 1, 2024 or to terminate spousal support as of November 1, 2024, ordered spousal support payable in the SSAG mid-range based on imputed incomes from July 1, 2025 until June 2029, ordered child support to reflect the imputed incomes and the claimant's full-time parenting from February 1, 2024, and ordered each party to bear their own costs.

Source excerpt

  • Income imputation
  • Variation/review of support
  • Retroactive support
  • Spousal support duration
  • Parenting time impact
Read case analysis
Family law 2026 BCSC 615

P. A. R. v. K. A. S.

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

Claimant failed to meet the burden to prove the adult son reverted to being a child of the marriage; Respondent's voluntary cash and expense payments from 2016–2022 met or exceeded likely guideline spousal support such that, given the subsequent material change (Respondent's retirement and health, Claimant's current income), it is grossly unfair to require payment of assessed arrears and they are cancelled; family property is to be divided equally under the FLA absent evidence of significant unfairness, subject to specific deductions for shared family debt and bailiff costs; divorce granted.

Source excerpt

  • Retroactive spousal support
  • Adult child support under divorce act s.2(1)(b)
  • Equal division of family property and s.95 significant unfairness
  • Cancellation of spousal arrears
  • Foreclosure and sale of family home
  • Family violence allegations and credibility
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Canada decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.