The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50809
LEGAL REPORT/FAMILY LAW The guidelines give a range of low, medium, or high support an individual pays, but one of the exceptions is if the payor makes more than $350,000 a year. Abbott, a partner at MacDonald & Partners LLP, says: "There are very few cases on this across Canada, and what we're seeing is a great divergence on how the courts handle it in the West as opposed to Ontario and the East." "In British Columbia it appears that judges, regardless if the spouse's income is above $350,000, tend to rely heavily on the SSAGs," says Shelly Kalra, an associate at MacDonald & Partners. "They do a cross-check with the part- ner who is receiving the spousal sup- port, they look at their budget and their needs, and the means of the partner who's paying, but all in all, the West Coast judges follow the guidelines and typically award the mid-range." Then, there's Ontario: "Some judges rely upon the guidelines, while other judges pretty much say automatically as soon as someone's income is over $350,000 the SSAGs do not apply. It is really quite different, it is fact-specific, it depends on how long the parties have been married and whether or not they have children," says Kalra. Before the child support guidelines, the Parras formula was the way to go, says Abbott, adding that some Ontario judges are suggesting use of the same sort of formula for spousal support. "So the support recipient puts together a budget, and quite often the payor will want to examine on that budget, there are cross-examinations, and then there is an argument on an interim motion and then on a final basis. . . . Obviously these people have money to litigate and there's a lot at stake." Abbott adds that in Alberta, it's much the same story as B.C. But again, in Ontario, "cases are all over the place." In the 2009 Denofrio v. Denofrio deci- sion in Ontario, Justice Maria Linhares de Sousa found that applying the SSAG NEWLY REVISED & UPDATED FOR 2011 Don't spend valuable time and resources updating your precedents when DIVORCEmate has already done the work for you! Separation Agreements and Marriage Contract/Agreement Revisions have been made to existing clauses and commentary, plus we've added new clauses and schedules (including a stream- lined "Statement of Income, Assets and Debts/Liabilities"), based on current case law and legislation including: easy-to-usecomprehensive well-drafted To Order: Call or visit us online today! DIVORCEmate One...From Marriage Contracts to Divorce Judgments and Everything in Between. a product of Toll Free: 1-800-653-0925 or 416-718-3461 x446 e: sales@divorcemate.com www.divorcemate.com 56 A U GUST 2011 www. CANADIAN Lawyermag.com ntitled-2 1 7/18/11 a 9:51:56 AM 2/17/10 10:10:57 AM on the interim motion on the husband's income of above $350,000 would not be fair, just, or reasonable because the award would amount to a division of property and monies which had yet to be decided on its merits. In the same province, the same year, Justice Cory Gilmore in Korkola V. Korkola found that the husband's income for support pur- poses was $540,000. In awarding spousal support the judge found it appropriate to award the wife 50 per cent of the par- ties' net disposable income. Ontario judges are demanding bud- gets, especially on the temporary orders when it involves a case of more than $350,000, says Kalra. But Abbott notes that "anybody can make a budget to fit within the guidelines, so that's why you get a lot more people examining under oath what these people have put in their budgets." He adds however, that in the cases of more than $350,000, it's "critical" for the recipient to add a budget to the Form 2 Bloor Street West, Suite 2603, Toronto, ON M4W 3E2 Tel: (416) 961-5612 Fax: (416) 961-6158 Email our partners at: sranot@marmerpenner.com jdebresser@marmerpenner.com