Digest: B.J.L. v D.B.L., 2018 SKQB 213

Date:August 18, 2019

Reported as: 2018 SKQB 213

Docket Number: QB18205 , FLD 165/16 JCR

Court: Court of Queen's Bench

Date: 2019-08-18

Judges:

  • Brown

Subjects:

  • Family Law � Spousal Support � Determination of Income
  • Family Law � Child Support � Determination of Income

Digest: The parties were married in 1998 and their children were born in 2000 and 2001 respectively. The petitioner wife was certified as a dental assistant in 1995 but worked only briefly during the marriage. She maintained that the respondent expected her to take care of the children almost exclusively while his responsibility was to support the family by farming. He operated the farm as the sole shareholder, director and officer of a farming corporation. The oldest child developed a serious medical problem when she was three. The second child developed severe anxiety in public school. As a consequence, the petitioner devoted additional time to meeting the needs of the children and was unable to take on employment or schooling. The parties separated initially in 2005, reconciled in 2006, and separated again in 2008. After each separation, the parties executed interspousal agreements. In the 2008 iteration, the respondent was to pay child support at $3,500 per month and spousal support at $1,500 per month with a review scheduled in November 2013. The parties agreed that during that five-year period the petitioner would retrain to become self-sufficient. The agreement also recognized that the oldest child had been diagnosed with a serious illness that might require the petitioner to withdraw from school to care for her, in which case, the spousal support might continue beyond the five-year period. In 2015 the petitioner began studying part-time to become an administrative assistant, expecting to finish in 2019. She planned to work full-time after the children each finished high school. The petitioner testified that after she left the marriage, her standard of living dropped. For example, she was unable to afford holidays or to renovate her residence. The petitioner had initiated the review of support in the fall of 2013 as required by the agreement but the parties could not resolve the matter so she applied to the court. She acknowledged that after September 2014 when the court made an interim order of $10,500 in monthly support combined with $8,000 in annual child tax benefit payments, her income was in the range of $134,000 per year. The respondent took the position that as the marriage was of only 10 years duration, he had paid for spousal support for ten years which was too long. The parties had not lived a lavish lifestyle during the marriage and after they separated, the petitioner expanded her expenditures from $66,800 in needs annually to over $180,000 per year. The...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP