The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50809
A SNAPSHOT OF CASES FROM COAST TO COAST Spousal support amounts for high-income earners vary wildly across the country. • In British Columbia's the husband's income was found to be $909,569 and the spousal support advisory guidelines range was between $24,435 and $28,507. The court awarded interim spousal support of $25,000 based on the wife's need after reviewing the SSAG range. • In Newfoundland's , the $20,000 awarded was below the $43,000 to $58,000 range suggested by the SSAG. Justice Richard LeBlanc said while the wife was entitled to a continuation of her lifestyle, particularly where the husband had the ability to pay, it didn't mean "a court should proceed as if it is writing the 'proverbial blank cheque.'" • In Ontario's , Justice Fred Graham awarded the wife $2,500 per month in spousal support based on her need — no mention of the spousal support advisory guidelines. The husband's income was found to be $3.5 million. • Yet, also in Ontario, Justice Susan Greer in , relied on the SSAG and awarded significant support, noting that where the ability to pay is not an issue, the parties should have the "financial ability to enjoy a similar lifestyle regardless of whether they do in fact choose to enjoy such a life- style." The husband's income was between $2.8 to $3.9 million. Greer upheld the lower court's award of $110,000 a month. • In British Columbia, in Justice Mary Ellen Boyd found the hus- band's income for support purposes to be $602,000, reviewed the SSAG and found the mid-range of $15,128 was appropriate. • Again in B.C., in , the husband's income was more than $1.6 million per year. On an interim motion, Justice Donna Martinson disregarded the guidelines' ceiling and awarded spousal support in excess of what the SSAG produced — $50,000 per month. On appeal, the appellate court found no error with Martinson's decision. — GD www.CANADIAN Lawyermag.com A U GUST 2011 57 ntitled-4 1 7/11/11 10:21:05 AM 13.1 financial statement. "You'll see some people even include cottage rental and winter vacations. That may seem exces- sive to the majority of Canadians, but if you've been living to a standard of $350,000-plus a year, it's reasonable." Abbott says he thinks the cost of living in Toronto versus if a judge were sitting in Kitchener or Thunder Bay may account for some of the differences in Ontario-based decisions. And the incidence of wealth transfers also plays a role. Meanwhile, an interesting wrinkle is starting to develop: lawyers are increas- ingly unaware of the final outcome of these cases because many are settling or going to arbitration. Abbott says he told one of his clients who earns $720,000, "I don't know what's going to be decided at court and so we settled because he'd rather have a sure thing. I think you're going to see a lot of them settling or hir- ing private arbitration so the decision never gets reported; nobody knows how they've been decided." In fact, Abbott is a fan of this grow- ing trend toward mediation and arbitra- tion. "Why would you want all of your dirty laundry in a courtroom where you're at the mercy of a judge and at the court's scheduling time? The individu- als can hire a very senior lawyer who specializes in family law, they can do it at a time that's convenient — even on the weekend — and it's all private." When Abbott meets new clients, there are two top questions: "How much am I going to pay and for how long am I going to have to pay?" The answer, he says, "varies on who the judge is, so, I think what would be useful is if there were a formula as to how to pay support. While the courts have been able to figure it out in terms of under $350,000, it's looking more and more like it's going to have to go to the Supreme Court to get settled because we can't give our clients defini- tive answers." O.( S .) v. O. (C. S .), Dobbin v. Dobbin S ir de v an v. S ir de v an E lgner v. E lgner E .( Y .J) v. R . ( Y ..) N L oesch v. W al ji