Canada Case Law

Crosby v. Crosby (Westhaver)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The Court found a non‑temporary material change in circumstances caused by the applicant's 2023 employment termination and concluded the applicant is intentionally unemployed without reasonable excuse; exercising discretion and considering earning capacity, assets, needs and SSAG/tax effects, the Court imputed annual income of $400,000 to the applicant and reduced spousal support to $7,500 per month effective October 1, 2023; underpayments from Feb 1, 2022 to Sep 30, 2023 and overpayments since Oct 1, 2023 were identified and left for calculation between the parties.

Source excerpt

• Material change in circumstances
• Intentional unemployment
• Income imputation
• Ssag analysis
• Underpayment and overpayment of support
• Variation orders objectives

Read case analysis

Pawluck v. Pawluck

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found a material change in circumstances and varied spousal support from $4,500 monthly to $2,250 for six months, then terminated it.

• Section 17 divorce act
• Material change of circumstances
• Retirement
• Pension sharing (pisp)
• Consent order interpretation
• Compensatory vs need-based support

Read case analysis

Price v. Price

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed an application to vary interim child and spousal support, finding the employment-loss change was not exceptional or urgent enough to wait for trial.

• Interim support
• Variation
• Spousal support
• Child support
• Underemployment
• Imputation of income

Read case analysis

MacPherson v. Williams

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court found unjust enrichment: Ms. MacPherson was deprived and Mr. Williams enriched with no juristic reason to deny recovery; bankruptcy did not bar recovery because RRSPs were exempt under the BIA but exemption is for retirement security not for defeating family claims; on joint family venture analysis an equal division of Mr. Williams' RRSP contributions is justified; no order was made regarding the home; Mr. Williams' income was imputed to $85,332 pre-accident for spousal support variation purposes, child support and spousal support amounts were adjusted accordingly, and disclosure an…

Source excerpt

• Unjust enrichment
• Joint family venture
• Pension disclosure
• Child support
• Spousal support
• Variation of support

Read case analysis

R.L.C. v. R.G.C.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court varied spousal support after finding material changes in circumstances, including ended child support and higher payor earnings, and set support at the mid-range guideline amount.

• Material change in circumstances
• Spousal support advisory guidelines
• Retroactive variation
• Income determination
• Spousal-support
• Support-variation

Read case analysis

P.H.D. v. M.L.D.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court set post-secondary support for the parties’ daughter, allocated the deficit by income, ordered direct payments to the daughter, and deemed retroactive obligations satisfied.

• Post-secondary child support
• Apportionment of contribution
• Child support guidelines s.3(2)(b)
• Resp treatment
• Retroactive support
• Post-secondary-child-support

Read case analysis

Rice v. Rice

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court reduced spousal support after finding the defendant’s income had materially declined, and ordered child support from the plaintiff. Retroactive child support was refused.

• Spousal support variation
• Child support determination
• Consent order review
• Income imputation
• Variation standard: substantial unforeseen continuing change
• Spousal-support-variation

Read case analysis

Ryan v. Hardy

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Court found a material change in circumstances warranting variation in part: spousal support should continue at $200 per month only until June 2006 when it will cease, lump sum request to fund TC5 denied because respondent delayed pursuing upgrading and applicant's existing debt allocation makes further burden unjustified, child support adjusted to $736 per month commencing November 2004, and retroactive increase denied as unjust and potentially onerous to applicant; each party to bear own costs.

Source excerpt

• Termination of spousal support
• Lump sum spousal support for education
• Variation of support orders
• Retroactive support
• Income determination
• Educational upgrading as basis for support

Read case analysis