Oldham v. King, (1986) 44 Man.R.(2d) 90 (CA)
Judge | Hall, Huband and Twaddle, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal (Manitoba) |
Case Date | October 01, 1986 |
Jurisdiction | Manitoba |
Citations | (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90 (CA) |
Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90 (CA)
MLB headnote and full text
Oldham v. King
(Suit No. 226/86)
Indexed As: Oldham v. King
Manitoba Court of Appeal
Hall, Huband and Twaddle, JJ.A.
November 17, 1986.
Summary:
A husband petitioned for a divorce. The trial judge, in a decision unreported in this series of reports, granted the divorce and ordered the husband to pay child maintenance of $100.00 for each of his two children. The wife appealed respecting the amount of child maintenance.
The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and increased the amount of child maintenance payable by the husband to $200.00 per month for each child.
Family Law - Topic 4014
Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - To children - Effect of shared custody agreement - A mother and father agreed that their two children would live with one parent for part of the week and with the other for the rest of the week - The decree nisi provided for shared custody; this arrangement meant that accommodation for the children must be duplicated - The mother earned $900.00 per month, after tax, less than the father, who was thus in a better position to contribute to the children's maintenance - The father intended to remarry a woman with three children - The Manitoba Court of Appeal held that the mother was entitled to child maintenance and to contribution to the cost of their accommodation with her - The court increased the amount of child maintenance payable from $100.00 to $200.00 per month per child.
Counsel:
A.A. Rich, Q.C., for the appellant;
K.E. Dunlop, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard before Hall, Huband and Twaddle, J.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal on October 1, 1986. The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Twaddle, J.A., on November 17, 1986.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wright v. Wright, (1996) 141 Sask.R. 44 (CA)
...T.D.), refd to. [para. 48]. Murray v. Murray (1989), 93 N.S.R.(2d) 66; 242 A.P.R. 66 (Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 49]. Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90; 5 R.F.L.(3d) 220 (C.A.), refd to. [para. House v. Tunney (1991), 95 Sask.R. 73; 35 R.F.L.(3d) 68 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 58]. Pyper ......
-
Monks v. Monks, (1993) 84 Man.R.(2d) 268 (QBFD)
...4011 ]. Cases Noticed: Moge v. Moge (1992), 145 N.R. 1; 81 Man.R.(2d) 161; 30 W.A.C. 161 (S.C.C.), appld. [para. 6]. Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Harrop v. Harrop (1991), 95 Sask.R. 258; 37 R.F.L.(3d) 433 (Q.B.), not appld. [para. 16]. Statutes Noticed: Di......
-
Davis v. Davis and Niemar, (1994) 98 Man.R.(2d) 94 (QBFD)
...order requiring the other parent to contribute, all that the primary care giver can afford. "As I pointed out in Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90; 5 R.F.L.(3d) 220 (C.A.), the sharing of care and control inevitably increases the costs of a child's care. The extent to which these......
-
Gunn v. Gunn, (1994) 100 Man.R.(2d) 6 (CA)
...making it impossible for the other parent to provide adequately for the children" - See paragraph 12. Cases Noticed: Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90; 5 R.F.L.(3d) 220 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Statutes Noticed: Court of Appeal Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. C-240; C.C.S.M., c. C-240, sect. 26(1......
-
Wright v. Wright, (1996) 141 Sask.R. 44 (CA)
...T.D.), refd to. [para. 48]. Murray v. Murray (1989), 93 N.S.R.(2d) 66; 242 A.P.R. 66 (Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 49]. Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90; 5 R.F.L.(3d) 220 (C.A.), refd to. [para. House v. Tunney (1991), 95 Sask.R. 73; 35 R.F.L.(3d) 68 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 58]. Pyper ......
-
Monks v. Monks, (1993) 84 Man.R.(2d) 268 (QBFD)
...4011 ]. Cases Noticed: Moge v. Moge (1992), 145 N.R. 1; 81 Man.R.(2d) 161; 30 W.A.C. 161 (S.C.C.), appld. [para. 6]. Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Harrop v. Harrop (1991), 95 Sask.R. 258; 37 R.F.L.(3d) 433 (Q.B.), not appld. [para. 16]. Statutes Noticed: Di......
-
Davis v. Davis and Niemar, (1994) 98 Man.R.(2d) 94 (QBFD)
...order requiring the other parent to contribute, all that the primary care giver can afford. "As I pointed out in Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90; 5 R.F.L.(3d) 220 (C.A.), the sharing of care and control inevitably increases the costs of a child's care. The extent to which these......
-
Gunn v. Gunn, (1994) 100 Man.R.(2d) 6 (CA)
...making it impossible for the other parent to provide adequately for the children" - See paragraph 12. Cases Noticed: Oldham v. King (1986), 44 Man.R.(2d) 90; 5 R.F.L.(3d) 220 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Statutes Noticed: Court of Appeal Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. C-240; C.C.S.M., c. C-240, sect. 26(1......