Canada Case Law

Morellato v. Morellato

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Applicant established a material change in circumstances (illness and reduced ability to work leading to sale of business); spousal support should not be terminated but reduced to the mid‑SSAG range and fixed for a term. Court set imputed incomes at $97,000 (applicant) and $50,000 (respondent), fixed duration 15 years from separation ending May 2029, calculated periodic support at $1,234/month and ordered the remaining support for the fixed term paid as a lump sum of $46,892 payable within one month.

Source excerpt

• Variation
• Material change in circumstances
• Spousal support advisory guidelines
• Lump sum spousal support
• Compensatory support
• Non-compensatory support

Read case analysis

Johnson v. Johnson

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The respondent sought a complete retroactive cancellation of spousal support and disputed ongoing entitlement; the court found the claimant achieved substantial success given the respondent's position and conduct (including deliberate breach of an interim order) and therefore awarded the claimant her costs on Scale B.

Source excerpt

• Spousal support
• Variation
• Material change in circumstances
• Costs of litigation

Read case analysis

S.K.R. v. K.S.D.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The respondent failed to establish a material change in circumstances; the Daum Report is an impermissible attempt to revisit a prior judicial income determination and the child's temporary residence and post‑secondary attendance were foreseeable and non‑continuing; therefore the Court lacks jurisdiction to vary the June 25, 2021 order, the variation application is dismissed, the interim suspension is set aside, and the existing child support order remains enforceable.

Source excerpt

• Variation of child support
• Material change in circumstances
• Imputed income under guidelines
• Section 7 extraordinary expenses
• Post‑majority support
• Arrears and rescission

Read case analysis

Hall v. Eggertson

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The JCC consent order was a final order; a material change in circumstances was established based on the child's increased travel time, sleep deprivation and associated effects which could not have been reasonably contemplated; however the respondent's proposed variation (limiting the claimant to weekend parenting and altering weekday shared time) was not in the child's best interests because it would reduce stability, curtail meaningful relationships and extracurricular participation, and therefore the variation was refused; the Christmas variation was dismissed for lack of supporting eviden…

Source excerpt

• Best interests of the child
• Material change in circumstances
• Parenting schedule
• Judicial case conference consent orders

Read case analysis

Townley v. Townley

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found no binding support agreement or waiver, but held the child’s residence change justified retroactive variation. It ordered offset child arrears and stepped-down spousal support.

• Child support variation
• Spousal support variation
• Retroactive variation
• Waiver and promissory estoppel
• Material change in circumstances
• Floors to ceilings exception

Read case analysis

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

Ivany v. Matson

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed most of a family-law application, finding no material change in circumstances to extend spousal support and no breach over RRSP rollover or late payments.

• Spousal support variation
• Material change in circumstances
• Rrsp rollover
• Parenting time variation
• Enforcement/breach of order
• Spousal-support-variation

Read case analysis

R. v. Ahmed

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The application succeeds because the applicant established a material change in circumstances by articulating new arguable grounds (uninformed plea and ineffective assistance of counsel), adequately explained the delay given the NCR context and late retention of counsel, and demonstrated arguable merits that outweigh the Crown's prejudice; accordingly the interests of justice require granting an extension of time to file a notice of appeal.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Not criminally responsible (ncr)
• Uninformed plea
• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Fresh evidence
• Prejudice to crown

Read case analysis

F.K.L. v. D.M.A.T.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a mother's relocation application to move the child from Gold River to Comox, finding no material change in circumstances and leaving the parenting order unchanged.

• Relocation
• Variation of parenting order
• Views of the child
• Best interests of the child
• Material change in circumstances
• Parenting coordinator

Read case analysis

Kim v. McIntosh

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion judge did not err: the children’s expressed preferences did not, on the record, constitute a material change warranting variation of Steele J.’s order because the wrongful removal risk persisted and the judge had little confidence the father would return children from Australia; alternative relief was unnecessary and the appeal is dismissed. The natural justice complaint lacked merit and the appellant’s chronic non-payment of support and costs provided an independent basis on which the appeal could have been quashed.

Source excerpt

• Parenting time
• Decision-making authority
• Material change in circumstances
• Best interests of the child
• Wrongful removal risk
• Hague convention

Read case analysis