Canada Case Law

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

Power v. Power

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

On the evidence, focusing solely on J's best interests, the court found that Mr. Power's pattern of coercive and undermining conduct had harmed J's relationship with his mother and that Ms. Power proved that relocation to Colby Village and a change to primary care with the mother having final decision-making over sporting activities were in J's best interests; accordingly relocation was permitted effective immediately and the parenting schedule was modified with an initial reduced-contact transition period for the father.

Source excerpt

• Parenting
• Custody
• Relocation
• Shared parenting
• Decision-making authority
• Best interests of the child

Read case analysis

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

Major v. Shupe

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Court may incorporate the Parenting and Support Act on its own motion in the interests of justice; Applicant failed to prove a 40% shared parenting regime so Contino s.9 adjustments are not warranted; CERB and the 2022 RRSP withdrawal are included in income for guideline calculations absent satisfactory justification to exclude; arrears recalculated on actual income and fixed at $108,961.76 to February 28, 2026 and are enforceable with limited repayment terms and mandatory disclosure going forward.

Source excerpt

• Shared parenting
• Retroactive child support
• Section 7 expenses
• Arrears calculation and enforcement
• Income inclusion (cerb, rrsp, wcb gross-up)
• Variation of support

Read case analysis

Shilo v. Vaisman

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On an interim basis, given deficient disclosure and unexplained spending of $250,721.88, the court applied the expense gross‑up method rather than a forensic corporate analysis or reliance on a single year holding company revenue; the respondent's guideline income was imputed to $429,856 per annum, the claimant's guideline income was fixed at $45,000 per annum, and interim spousal support of $4,530/month and child support of $5,085/month were ordered commencing March 1, 2026.

Source excerpt

• Income imputation
• Guideline income
• Corporate income method
• Expense gross-up method
• Shared parenting
• Spousal support advisory guidelines

Read case analysis

M.D.F. v. D.O.T.C.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that a review of 'Parenting Time' in the consent order permits de novo consideration of parenting time, including shared parenting, despite a provision that the children 'principally reside' with the Respondent; an immediate s.211 report was unnecessary and should be deferred until after a transitional increase in parenting time, and on the merits a sudden move to 50/50 was not in the children's best interests so an intermediate increased schedule was ordered; costs were awarded to the Respondent as the substantially successful party on the central issue.

Source excerpt

• Parenting time review
• Shared parenting
• Section 211 report
• Best interests of the child
• Consent order interpretation
• Costs

Read case analysis

Hare v. Muir

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Child support-related claims were partly allowed. The court ordered retroactive support, declined to impute income to the claimant, and dismissed reimbursement for Tarys’ bookkeeping course.

• Retroactive child support
• Shared parenting
• Imputation of income
• Extraordinary expenses
• Post-secondary education
• Admissibility of medical evidence

Read case analysis

Devoe v. Johnston

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Applicant failed to meet the burden to justify ongoing supervised parenting because there were no safety concerns requiring supervision, the limited supervision claimed has already occurred, and the father's supervised contact has been consistent; shared parenting was rejected because entrenched mistrust, poor communication and the father's refusal to engage in co-parenting education make cooperation unrealistic; accordingly primary care and final decision-making were awarded to the mother, a defined parenting schedule to the father was ordered, and child support of $548/month with arrears fi…

Source excerpt

• Best interests of the child
• Supervised parenting
• Shared parenting
• Parenting time schedule
• Administrative recalculation of support

Read case analysis

T.N.P. v. D.E.P.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found a material change based on the respondent’s move to Kimberley and ordered interim week-on/week-off parenting, with child support adjourned pending disclosure.

• Material change
• Best interests of the child
• Interim order variation
• Shared parenting
• Maximum contact principle
• Set-off support

Read case analysis

Williams v. Randall

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Shared parenting between Meagan and Cedric was refused because they cannot sustain the necessary cooperation and timely, respectful communication required for a shared‑parenting regime; Kevin Randall’s historic conviction was given no operative weight in present parenting allocation because multiple contemporary expert risk assessments and treatment placed him at the lowest risk of reoffending and there were no safety concerns; Meagan remains primary residential parent because removal would be destabilizing, but major decision‑making is reallocated to Cedric and Kevin jointly to minimize conf…

Source excerpt

• Best interests of the child
• Shared parenting
• Supervised vs unsupervised access
• Retroactive child support
• Stepparent support (chartier issues)
• Parenting plans

Read case analysis