Form and types of order
| Author | Julien D. Payne/Marilyn A. Payne |
| Pages | 362-416 |
FORM AND TYPES OF ORDER
A. DIVERSE TYPES OF ORDER
e diverse types of support order that maybe g rantedpursua ntto sect ions a nd of the
Guidelinesareasfollows:
(i) An order topay a lumpsum;
(ii) An order tose cure a lump sum;
(iii) An order top ay and secure a lump sum;
(iv) An order topay periodic sums;
(v) An order tose cure periodic sums;
(vi) An order to pay and secure periodic sums .
ecourtisnotrestrictedtomakingonlyonetypeoforder.Acombinationofthevari-
ous type s of order may be accommodated.
When child support is granted, it is usually ordered to be paid on a periodic basis —
weekly,fortnightlyormonthly.AcourthasnojurisdictionundersectionoftheGuide-
lines to order an obl igor to transfer property i n satisfaction of his ch ild support obligation.
Indeed, even the mutua l consent of the spouses would appear in sufficient to confer jur is-
diction on the cou rts to order a tra nsfer of propert y in the exercise of juri sdiction u nder
section of t he Guidelines, although a n out-of-court settlement could be negoti ated by the
spouses or an order to pay m ight be enforced by way of execution agai nst the land or other
assets of the obligor.
In Giao v. McCready,a father on social assistance was ordered to pay nom inal child
support of permonth and directed tokeep the motherand the Director of Maintenance
Enforcementinformedofanyincomechangesassoonastheyoccurred.efatherwasalso
required to provide his income tax returns and notices of assessment on an annual basis to
themotherandtheDirectorofMaintenanceEnforcement.
SeeMcConnell v. McConnell (), N.B.R . (d) (C.A .).
[] N.S.J. No. (S.C.).
Form and Types of Order
B. INTERIM ORDERS
A court may grant an interim order for child support pending the determination of an ap-
plication for a perma nent order.Interim and perm anent orders fall subject to the same
criteria in that both types of order must be made in accordance with the applicable guide-
lines.An interi m order, like a permanent order, may be made for a defin ite or indefinit e
period or until a specified event occurs and the court may impose such terms, conditions or
restrictionsinconnectionwiththeinterimorderasitthinksfitandjust.
An interim order for child support is unnecessary wherethe parents continue to reside
under the same roof.
Interim proceedings are not geared for the final determination of i ssues. e evidence
isentirelybyaffidavitandthecourtlacksthebenefitofseeingthepartiesandtheirwit-
nesses testify in open court and having their evidence tested under cross-examination. In-
terimproceedingsaresummaryinnatureandprovidearoughjusticeatbest.emeritsof
thecasearenotthrashedoutininterimproceedings.
) Types of Interim Order
Section of the Federal Child Support Guidelines expressly empowers the court to order
interimsupportbywayofsuchlumpsumand/orperiodicsumsasthecourtdeemsrea-
sonable. On an applic ation for interim ch ild support and for t he proportionate sha ring of
extraordinary expenses relating to extracurricular activities, a lump sum may be granted
respecting actual expenses being incurred, pending resolution of diverse issues at trial.
SectionoftheFederal Child Suppor t Guidelines expresslyconfersjurisdictiononthe
courttomakeorderstopayorsecure,ortopayandsecureinterimsupport.
) Effect of Reconci liation on I nterim Order
Ifaninterimsupportorderisterminatedbyanunsuccessfulspousalreconciliation,anew
order can be obtai ned simply by bringing back t he original motion and fi ling a supplement-
ary affidavit to establish the new facts.
) Effect of Divorce on Interim Order
An interimorder for supportmay be grantedpursuant tothe Divorce Act once a petition for
divorce has been fi led. An interim order i s not automatically term inated by the pronounce-
ment of a divorce. Section .() of the Divorce Act permitsaninterimordertocontinue
Divorce Act, R.S .C. (d Supp.), c. , s. .().
Ibid.,s..().
Ibid.,s..().
Moore v. Fernandes, [] O.J. No. (S.C.J.).
Gibb v. Gibb,[]B.C.J.No.(S.C.).
Fuzi v. Fuzi,[] B.C .J. No. (S.C.).
Grail v. Grail (),R.F.L.(d) (Ont.Master),aff’d(), R.F.L.(d) (Ont.Ct.Gen.Div.).
Mitchell v. Mitche ll (),N.S.R.(d) (T.D.);compareZemliak v. Zemliak(), R.F.L. (d)
(Man. C. A.).
CHILD SUPPORT GU IDELINES IN CANADA,
until a permanent order is granted. Aninterimordermaypostdateadivorcejudgmentand
maybetheresultofundertakingsmadebyapartyatthedivorcehearing.
) Relationship between Federal Divorce Legislation and
Provincial/Territorial Legislation
e instit ution of divorce proceed ings in one prov ince does not stop the appl icant from
seeking i nterim chi ld support in anot her province under prov incial leg islation. Where a
support order under provi ncial legi slation is outst anding , a subsequent order for interi m
relief in a divorce proc eeding may supplement or incorpor ate the former order where the
means and needs of the respect ive spouses war rant. An order for suppor t made pursuant
to provincia l legislation , even if intended to b e final, does not b ar a subsequent applic ation
for interim suppor t by way of corollary relief in d ivorce proceedings. Any s uch application
deals wit h the matter de novo anddoesnotrequireproofofachangeofcircumstances.
However, an application in a d ivorce proceeding for interim suppor t in the same a mount
as that awarded under provincial legislation has been dismissed on a preliminary objection
because it is i mproper to embark on an identical application a s one already determined.
) Relevance of Ultimate Entitlement; Def inition of “Child of the
Marriage”
A court cannot undertake an intensive investigation of the facts on a motion for interim
childsupport. Wherethe court issatisfied on theavailablematerial thatthere is a likelihood
that permanent s upport wil l be ordered, an interim child supp ort order is appropriate.
Where an issue i s raised on a n application for interim child suppor t as to whether the
respondent stood in the place of a parent to the child, the court must be satisfied that a
prima facie case has been established before granting an order. To establish a prima facie
case, there must be evidence before the court as to t he nature and quality of t he respond-
ent’srelationshipwiththechildren.
Interim chi ld support may be ordered on the basis of prima facie evidence that one
spousestoodintheplaceofaparenttotheotherspouse’schildfromapriorrelationship,
Boznick v. Boznick (), R. F.L. (d) (B.C.S.C.); Dupont v. Dupont( ), R. F.L. (d)
(B.C.S .C.).
Wedg wood v. Wedg woo d (), Nfld. & P.E.I.R. (Nfld. U.F.C.).
Purse v. Purse (),Man.R.(d)(Q.B.).
Gobeille v. Savard,[]C.A.(Que.C.A.).
Asselstine v. Asselstine, un reported, February , (Ont. C.A.).
Jochimski v. Jochimski (),B.C.L.R.(d)(S.C.);Goodfellow v. Goodfellow (), O .R. (d)
(H.C.J.).
B. (R.) v. B. (M.)(),R.F.L.(d)(Ont. H.C.J.).
Mudrinic v. Mudrinic (), R.F.L. (d) at (Ont. H.C.J.).
Richardson v. Richardson, [] O.J. No. (S.C.J.).
T.I.M. v. T.L.M., [] B.C.J. No. (S.C.); B.L. v. B.A.A., [] O.J. No. (S.C.J.); Bell v. Bell,[]
O.J. No. (S.C.J.); Prowse-Myers v. Myers,[]S.J.No.(Q.B.);Bagu v. Bag u,[]S.J.No.
(Q.B.); Walker-Bodnarek v. Bodnarek,[]S.J.No.(Q.B.);James v. Torren s,[]S.J.No.
(Q.B.);Wojcichowsky v. Wojcichowsky,SKQB ,[]S.J.No..
Sankey v. Aydt,[]S.J.No. (Q.B.).
MacDonald v. Moutter,[]B.C.J.No.(S.C.);MacArthur v. Demers, [] O.J. No. (Gen.
To continue reading
Request your trial