Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Family law – Divorce – Family assets – Support – Child support – Spousal support – Parties separating after lengthy marriage – Court ordered division of property taking into account husband’s dissipation of assets after separation – Retroactive and continuing spousal support ordered – Income not imputed to wife for child support purposes – Whether lower courts made palpable and overriding and material errors and misapprehended the evidence in not directing that the respondent was to pay child support, for not imputing income to the respondent, in finding that the adult children were not children of the marriage, in directing the applicant to pay retroactive spousal support and $5,404.00 per month for ongoing spousal support, and in ordering the division of assets as he did

The parties married in 1984 and separated in 2008. They were divorced in 2010. The applicant had one child and the respondent had two children from previous marriages. Initially, those children resided with them. Together they had three daughters who are now 27, 24 and almost 21 years of age. The applicant is 59 and the respondent is 61 years of age. Throughout the marriage, the respondent was a homemaker while the applicant earned income and bonuses from his employment that in the latter years that ranged from $220,000 to $298,000. Among other assets, the parties owned a cottage in Ontario and the matrimonial home in Edmonton. The respondent occupied the matrimonial home following separation and the applicant paid all of the expenses until it was sold in June, 2010. Each party received $175,000 from the sale proceeds and the balance of $224,000 was held in trust pending a final resolution of the property issues. The applicant initially provided the respondent with $400 every two weeks but she was awarded $1,200 per month in interim spousal support in December, 2009. This was increased to $2,700 per month in October of 2010 by court order. After the separation, the applicant lived in rental accommodation and from time to time, he had one or two of his daughters residing there with him. He supported them and paid for tuition and related expenses. By the time of trial, the youngest daughter, who was then 19 years of age, moved back in with him as she was planning to return to school. The applicant was engaged to a woman who resided in a home they had purchased together. He paid all of the expenses there as his fiancé was not employed and rented a third place for himself and his daughter.