B.B.M. v. W.W.M., (1994) 156 A.R. 392 (QB)

• Judge: Veit, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: July 26, 1994
• Citations: (1994), 156 A.R. 392 (QB)

B.B.M. v. W.W.M. (1994), 156 A.R. 392 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of the Maintenance Enforcement Act, Chapter C-8.1, Revised Statutes of Alberta 1980, as amended.

B.B.M. (respondent/petitioner) v. W.W.M. (applicant/respondent)

(Action No. 4803-84341)

Indexed As: B.B.M. v. W.W.M.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Veit, J.

July 26, 1994.

Summary:

A couple divorced. The husband agreed to pay $500 monthly child support for two children. This was incorporated in a court order. No support was ever paid. The hus­band applied to extinguish the ongoing support and cancel the arrears.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench refused to cancel the arrears, but extinguished the ongoing support.

Family Law - Topic 2203

Maintenance of wives and children - Persons obligated to support children (in loco parentis) - A couple divorced - The husband agreed to pay $500 monthly support for two children (twins) - He never paid - He disputed paternity, requested DNA testing, and applied to extinguish the ongoing support and cancel the arrears - The mother acknowledged that he might not be the father - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench refused to cancel the arrears, because the husband was acting in loco parentis when they accumulated - However, the court extin­guished ongoing support - The mother was no longer on social assistance and was willing to give up the ongoing support - It was not in the children's best interests to proceed with DNA testing - The loco parentis relationship could be terminated in this exceptional situation.

Family Law - Topic 4014.3

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - To children - Blood tests re paternity - [See Family Law - Topic 2203 ].

Family Law - Topic 4031

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Effect of relationships of spouse of claimant - A divorced husband applied to extinguish ongoing support and cancel arrears for two children - He was living with a new woman and her three children - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench refused to take into account his obligation to the second family, where it was neither legal nor moral - See paragraphs 30 to 33.

Family Law - Topic 4050

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Enforcement - Payment or cancellation of arrears of maintenance - [See Family Law - Topic 2203 ].

Family Law - Topic 4054.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Enforcement - Effect of bankruptcy of payor - A couple divorced - The husband agreed to pay $500 monthly support for two children, but never paid - He applied to extinguish the ongoing support and cancel the arrears - He argued that his bankruptcy was a material change in cir­cumstance - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the argument - In the context of the motion this was a favour­able change of circumstances - The bank­ruptcy proceedings would presumably relieve him of some of his commercial obligations - See paragraph 20.

Cases Noticed:

Long v. Long (1993), 147 A.R. 108 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 9, 10, 26].

Jackson v. Jackson, [1973] S.C.R. 205, refd to. [para. 9].

Salomon v. Salomon & Co.; Salomon & Co. v. Salomon, [1987] A.C. 22 (H.L.), refd to. [paras. 9, 27].

Kosmopoulos et al. v. Continental Insur­ance Co. of Canada et al., [1987] 1 S.C.R. 2; 74 N.R. 360; 21 O.A.C. 4; 34 D.L.R.(4th) 208, refd to. [paras. 9, 27, 28].

Houle v. Banque Nationale du Canada, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 122; 114 N.R. 161; 35 Q.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc. and Chedore, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154; 130 N.R. 1; 49 O.A.C. 161; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 8 C.R.(4th) 145, refd to. [para. 9].

Amdue Holdings Ltd. v. Calgary (City); Audem Construction Ltd. v. Calgary (City) (1980), 24 A.R. 541 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 9, 27].

Casden v. Cooper Enterprises Ltd. et al. (1990), 34 F.T.R. 241 (T.D.), apprvd. 151 N.R. 199 (F.C.A.), refd to. [paras. 9, 27].

B.G. Preeco I (Pacific Coast) Ltd. v. Bon Street Holdings Ltd. (1989), 37 B.C.L.R.(2d) 258 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

MacPhail v. Tackama Forest Products Ltd., [1994] 3 W.W.R. 36; 86 B.C.L.R.(2d) 218 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

Nedco Ltd. v. Clark, [1973] 6 W.W.R. 425 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [paras. 9, 10, 29].

Suncor Inc. Resources Group, Oil Sands Division v. Allarco Group Ltd. (1987), 77 A.R. 378; 53 Alta. L.R.(2d) 107 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Jones v. Jones, [1962] 1 All E.R. 442, refd to. [para. 9].

Bregman v. Bregman (1978), 7 R.F.L.(2d) 201 (Ont. H.C.), affd. (1979), 25 O.R.(2d) 254 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 9, 27].

Crowe v. Crowe, [1985] O.C.P. 110, refd to. [paras. 9, 27].

Gabriel v. Gabriel et al. (1980), 20 A.R. 189; 14 R.F.L.(2d) 174 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Shuler v. Shuler (1986), 3 R.F.L.(3d) 9 (Alta. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Lindberg v. Lindberg (1976), 30 R.F.L. 180 (Sask. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Richardson v. Richardson, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 857; 77 N.R. 1; 22 O.A.C. 1; 7 R.F.L.(3d) 304; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 699; 17 C.P.C.(2d) 699, refd to. [para. 9].

Bolan v. Bolan, [1990] W.D.F.L. 541 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

Snelgrove-Fowler v. Fowler (1993), 138 A.R. 192 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 9, 33].

Debacker v. Debacker (1993), 143 A.R. 228 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Edwards v. Edwards, [1992] A.J. No. 1086 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Zierath v. Zierath, [1993] A.J. No. 206 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Vervoorst v. Vervoorst (1991), 122 A.R. 280 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Dombroski v. Dombroski (1993), 139 A.R. 110 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Chelmick v. Chelmick (1991), 118 A.R. 385 (Q.B.), revd. in part (1992), 131 A.R. 162; 25 W.A.C. 162 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Doole v. Doole (1991), 115 A.R. 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Carson v. Carson (1986), 49 R.F.L.(2d) 459 (Ont. Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 9].

Timmerman v. Timmerman, [1976] 4 W.W.R. 296 (Man. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Aksugyuk v. Aksugyuk, [1975] 3 W.W.R. 91 (N.W.T.S.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

Desjardines v. Desjardines (1991), 113 A.R. 168 (Q.B.), refd to. [paras. 9, 42].

Morrison-Pelletier v. Pelletier (1991), 83 D.L.R.(4th) 287 (Ont. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 9].

Frankel Structural Steel Ltd. v. Goden Holdings Ltd., [1971] S.C.R. 250, refd to. [para. 10].

L. v. Lightfoot, [1973] 1 O.R. 643 (Mas­ter), refd to. [para. 10].

Strode v. Strode (1977), 5 R.F.L.(2d) 183 (B.C. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 10].

Grant v. Wolansky (1994), 154 A.R. 234 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 11].

Theriault v. Theriault (1994), 149 A.R. 210; 63 W.A.C. 210 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 11, 42].

Levesque v. Levesque (1994), 155 A.R. 26; 73 W.A.C. 26 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Statutes Noticed:

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, generally [para. 20].

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 3, generally [paras. 30, 39, 40].

Maintenance Enforcement Act, S.A. 1985, c. M-0.5, sect. 13 [paras. 9, 45]; sect. 14 [para. 5 et seq.]; sect. 33 [paras. 6, 45].

Counsel:

L.M. Paton, for the applicant, W.W.M.;

B. Sawyer, for the respondent, B.B.M., formerly on her own behalf;

H. Roots, for the Director of Maintenance Enforcement.

This case was heard on March 1, 22, 24, 25 and 29, 1994, by Veit, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on July 26, 1994.