Adam v. Adam, (1993) 89 Man.R.(2d) 275 (QBFD)

• Judge: Schulman, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: October 12, 1993
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1993), 89 Man.R.(2d) 275 (QBFD)

Adam v. Adam (1993), 89 Man.R.(2d) 275 (QBFD)

MLB headnote and full text

Ruth Kathleen Adam (petitioner) v. Joseph Andre Gerard Adam (respondent)

(File No. FD 86-01-08196)

Indexed As: Adam v. Adam

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Family Division

Winnipeg Centre

Schulman, J.

October 12, 1993.

Summary:

Following a divorce, Adam was ordered to pay maintenance to his wife as well as child support. Subsequently, Adam applied for, inter alia, a retroactive reduction in the quantum of the spousal and child support and the deleting of certain arrears.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, allowed the application in part.

Family Law - Topic 4014

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - To children - The parties divorced in 1988 - The wife (aged 46) obtained custody of two children - The husband (aged 48) was ordered to pay spousal maintenance and child support of $350 per month - In 1992, one child left the mother's residence to attend university - The husband reduced payments to the wife to $200 and began giving assistance directly to the child attending university - The husband had an income of some $20,000 per year and the wife had an income of $18,000 (excluding mainte­nance) - In 1993, the husband applied for a retroactive reduction in the amount of spousal and child support - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, allowed the application and ordered the husband to pay $100 per month directly to the child at university and $250 to the wife - See paragraphs 1 to 31.

Family Law - Topic 4017

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Variation of periodic payments - [See Family Law - Topic 4014 ].

Family Law - Topic 4050

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance enforcement - Payment or cancellation of arrears of maintenance - The parties divorced in 1988 - The wife (aged 46) obtained custody of two children - The husband (aged 48) was ordered to pay spousal maintenance and child support of $350 per month - In 1992, one child left the mother's residence to attend university - The husband reduced payments to the wife to $200 and began giving assistance directly to the child attending university - In 1993, the husband applied for a deletion of the maintenance arrears of $1,906.48 - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, allowed the application in part - The court considered the application as if it had been brought in 1992 when the husband diverted payment to the child outside the residence - The court remitted $1,000 and set the arrears at $906.48 - See paragraph 32.

Cases Noticed:

Moge v. Moge, [1993] 1 W.W.R. 481; 145 N.R. 1; 81 Man.R.(2d) 161; 30 W.A.C. 161; 43 R.F.L.(3d) 345 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 26, Appendix].

Fejes v. Fejes (1993), 83 Man.R.(2d) 273; 36 W.A.C. 273 (C.A.), refd to. [Appen­dix].

Gawley v. Gawley (1993), 86 Man.R.(2d) 317 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [Appendix].

Shinkarik v. Shinkarik (1993), 87 Man.R.(2d) 39 (Q.B.), refd to. [Appen­dix].

LaBelle v. LaBelle (1993), 87 Man.R.(2d) 207 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [Appendix].

Garbutt v. Garbutt (1993), 84 Man.R.(2d) 237 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [Appendix].

Monks v. Monks (1993), 84 Man.R.(2d) 268 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [Appendix].

Statutes Noticed:

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. D-8, sect. 12 [para. 23].

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 3, sect. 15(2), sect. 15(3), sect. 16(1), sect. 16(3), sect. 17(1), sect. 17(2) [para. 23]; sect. 17(4) [paras. 21, 24, 25]; sect. 17(7) [paras. 19, 26, 27]; sect. 17(7)(a), sect. 17(7)(b), sect. 17(7)(c) [para. 26]; sect. 17(8) [para. 19].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Foster, Ronald S., Q.C., Case Comment, Moge v. Moge, 43 R.F.L.(3d) 465, gen­erally [Appendix].

McLeod, James M., Case Comment, Moge v. Moge, 43 R.F.L.(3d) 455, generally [Appendix].

Counsel:

Reuben Z. Potash, for the petitioner;

Connie A. Weipert, for the respondent.

This matter was heard by Schulman, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the following judgment on October 12, 1993.