Carter v. Carter, (1998) 76 O.T.C. 268 (GD)

• Judge: Kozak, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: September 29, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1998), 76 O.T.C. 268 (GD)

Carter v. Carter (1998), 76 O.T.C. 268 (GD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] O.T.C. TBEd. OC.097

James Hamilton Carter (applicant) v. Germaine Faith Carter (respondent)

(No. 98-0846)

Indexed As: Carter v. Carter

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Thunder Bay

Kozak, J.

September 29, 1998.

Summary:

A husband applied to terminate or reduce his spousal support obligation arising from a final judgment. The wife cross applied for an increase in spousal support payable. The husband moved for an interim order suspending the payment of spousal support pending the hearing of the applications.

The Ontario Court (General Division) dismissed the husband's motion. The suspension or variation of the final judgment was a function better left to the judge hearing the application. The court had jurisdiction to make an interim variation of a final order under the Family Law Act in clear cases of hardship or, where the continuation of the order would be incongruous and absurd. Neither of these factors came into play.

Family Law - Topic 2383

Maintenance of wives and children - Variation of - Jurisdiction - See paragraphs 1 to 12.

Family Law - Topic 4018

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Variation of - Jurisdiction - See paragraphs 1 to 12.

Family Law - Topic 4195

Divorce - Practice - Judgments and orders - Variation of - See paragraphs 1 to 12.

Cases Noticed:

French v. Woods (1992), 42 R.F.L.(3d) 345 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 8].

Veres v. Veres (1987), 9 R.F.L.(3d) 447 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

Butt v. Butt (1989), 22 R.F.L.(3d) 415 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

Linton v. Linton (1990), 42 O.A.C. 328; 30 R.F.L.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Grainger v. Grainger (1992), 100 Sask.R. 161; 18 W.A.C. 161; 39 R.F.L.(3d) 101 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Strang v. Strang (1992), 137 N.R. 203; 125 A.R. 331; 14 W.A.C. 331; 39 R.F.L.(3d) 233 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

Flett v. Flett (1992), 43 R.F.L.(3d) 23 (Ont. U.F.C.), refd to. [para. 9].

Rivers v. Rivers (1993), 47 R.F.L.(3d) 90 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 9].

Shadbolt v. Shadbolt (1997), 45 O.T.C. 124 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 10].

Counsel:

Mary Ann Currie, for the applicant;

Douglas C. Shaw, for the respondent.

These applications were heard before Kozak, J., of the Ontario Court (General Division), who delivered the following judgment on September 29, 1998.