R.M. v. W.S., (1995) 147 N.S.R.(2d) 176 (FC)

• Case Date: December 14, 1995
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1995), 147 N.S.R.(2d) 176 (FC)

R.M. v. W.S. (1995), 147 N.S.R.(2d) 176 (FC);

  426 A.P.R. 176

MLB headnote and full text

R.M. (applicant) v. W.S. (respondent)

(F.K. 90-0037)

Indexed As: R.M. v. W.S.

Nova Scotia Family Court

Levy, J.F.C.

December 14, 1995.

Summary:

The mother of a 7.5 year old child lived in Nova Scotia. The father lived in Ottawa. A 1991 consent order gave the father access and required him to pay $600 per month child support. The mother applied to review access and support on the basis of changed circumstances.

The Nova Scotia Family Court varied access and increased child support to $1,070 per month until May 1996 and $1,250 per month thereafter.

Family Law - Topic 2012

Custody and access - Access awards - Where mother and father reside in differ­ent cities - The mother of a 7.5 year old child lived in Nova Scotia - The father lived in Ottawa - The father had access under a 1991 consent order - The child was now in school - The mother wanted access reviewed - The Nova Scotia Family Court varied access - The court ordered, inter alia, that "the father shall be at liberty to install, at his expense, in Katie's bed­room at her mother's home, a telephone and Fax machine. All costs associated with this are to be at the expense of the father. The mother shall co-operate with the installation of this equipment and permit Katie unfettered use of it for the purpose of communicating with her father." - See paragraphs 11 to 25.

Family Law - Topic 2034

Custody and access - Supplementary orders - Compulsory counselling for par­ents - The mother of a 7.5 year old child lived in Nova Scotia - The father lived in Ottawa - The father had access under a 1991 consent order - The child was be­ginning to internalize the conflict between her parents - The Nova Scotia Family Court ordered that the parents attend man­datory counselling to take place in Ontario or Nova Scotia - Their proposal was to be submitted to the court for approval - The parents were to equally bear the cost of counselling, with the father to pay two-thirds of the mother's accommodation costs if counselling was taken in Ontario - See paragraphs 22 to 23.

Family Law - Topic 2348

Maintenance of wives and children - Maintenance of children - Allocation between mother and father - A 1991 consent order required the father to pay $600 per month child support - The mother sought a variation - The father's gross monthly income was $7,308.16 - The mother's gross monthly income, ex­clusive of maintenance, was $1,160.19 - She had an education degree, but was now unemployed - The Nova Scotia Family Court fixed child care costs at $1,246 per month - The father's percentage of their gross monthly income was 86%, which would require him to pay $1,071 per month, grossed up to $1,467.12 to cover the mother's tax costs - The father also spent approximately $600 per month to exercise access - Requiring the father to pay over $2,000 per month would require him to pay approximately 35% of his gross monthly income - The court ordered the father to pay $1,070 per month until May 1996 (when access costs would decrease) and $1,250 per month thereafter - See paragraphs 26 to 41.

Cases Noticed:

S.C.C. v. P.P.C. (1993), 122 N.S.R.(2d) 205; 338 A.P.R. 205; 47 R.F.L.(3d) 253 (Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 27].

C.P.O'F.-S. v. G.J.S. (1995), 142 N.S.R.(2d) 389; 407 A.P.R. 389 (Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 27].

Levesque v. Levesque (1994), 155 A.R. 26; 73 W.A.C. 26; 4 R.F.L.(4th) 377 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

Edwards v. Edwards (1994), 133 N.S.R.(2d) 8; 380 A.P.R. 8 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

Wight v. Wight (1995), 145 N.S.R.(2d) 199; 418 A.P.R. 199 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

Willick v. Willick, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 670; 173 N.R. 321; 125 Sask.R. 81; 81 W.A.C. 81; 6 R.F.L.(4th) 161, refd to. [para. 28].

Counsel:

Lynn Reierson, for the applicant;

Leslie Dellapinna, for the respondent.

This application was heard before Levy, J.F.C., of the Nova Scotia Family Court, who delivered the following judgment on December 14, 1995.