Raikou v. Kokkinis, 2000 BCSC 1261

• Judge: Lynn Smith, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
• Case Date: June 13, 2000
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: 2000 BCSC 1261;[2000] B.C.T.C. 627 (SC)

Raikou v. Kokkinis, [2000] B.C.T.C. 627 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] B.C.T.C. TBEd. SE.021

Georgia Raikou (plaintiff) v. Peter Kokkinis (defendant)

(F990488; 2000 BCSC 1261)

Indexed As: Raikou v. Kokkinis

British Columbia Supreme Court

Vancouver

Lynn Smith, J.

August 22, 2000.

Summary:

The parties married in 1981 and separated in 1998. The wife had custody of their three children and continued to live in the matrimonial home. The husband had access. The husband was an electrician and a self-employed proprietor of a business which he started after the separation. The wife worked part time. She was unable to work full time because of injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident. The parties' assets consisted of the matrimonial home, some furnishings, two vehicles, two small RRSP accounts and the husband's business. The husband had debts of $25,000 (as of the date of the triggering event). At issue was child support, division of family assets and spousal maintenance.

The British Columbia Supreme Court considered the revenue from the husband's business and concluded that the husband's income was at least $62,500/year. The court imputed that income to the husband for the purpose of the Federal Child Support Guidelines and ordered him to pay child support of $1,100/month, plus his proportionate share of extraordinary expenses ($72/month) and arrears of $2,700 at $100/month. The court held that the husband's business was not a family asset and that the husband's debts should be taken into account in the apportionment of family assets. The court ordered that the wife have exclusive possession of the matrimonial home for five years and that when the house was sold the net proceeds would be divided 60% to the wife and 40% to the husband. Each party would retain their RRSP and their vehicle. Canada Pension Plan credits were divided equally. The wife was to assume responsibility for the mortgage and $6,500 of the other debts. The husband was ordered to pay spousal support of $1,200/month, reviewable at the time of the sale of the matrimonial home.

Family Law - Topic 631

Husband and wife - Marital property - Matrimonial home - Right to possession of - See paragraphs 45 to 46.

Family Law - Topic 865

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Matrimonial home - See paragraphs 45 to 46.

Family Law - Topic 868.2

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Debts - See paragraphs 40 to 43 and 48.

Family Law - Topic 877

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Business, commercial or non-family assets - See paragraph 35.

Family Law - Topic 900

Husband and wife - Liability for spouse's debts - Debts incurred by spouse - For family purposes - See paragraphs 40 to 43 and 48.

Family Law - Topic 2353

Maintenance of wives and children - Maintenance of children - Retroactive maintenance - See paragraph 34.

Family Law - Topic 4001.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance and awards - Retroactive awards - See paragraph 34.

Family Law - Topic 4022

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance and awards - Awards - To wife - Considerations - See paragraphs 50 to 51.

Family Law - Topic 4045.5

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Support guidelines (incl. nondivorce cases) - Calculation or attribution of income - See paragraphs 13 to 21 and 31.

Cases Noticed:

L.S. v. E.P. (1999), 126 B.C.A.C. 28; 206 W.A.C. 28 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

Yiannitsopoulos v. Patseas (1997), 92 B.C.A.C. 98; 150 W.A.C. 98; 28 R.F.L.(4th) 246 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

Toth v. Toth (1995), 64 B.C.A.C. 81; 105 W.A.C. 81; 13 B.C.L.R.(3d) 1; 17 R.F.L.(4th) 55 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

Metzner v. Metzner (1997), 91 B.C.A.C. 241; 148 W.A.C. 241; 34 B.C.L.R.(3d) 314; 28 R.F.L.(4th) 166 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

Moge v. Moge, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 813; 145 N.R. 1; 81 Man.R.(2d) 161; 30 W.A.C. 161; [1993] 1 W.W.R. 481; 99 D.L.R.(4th) 456; 43 R.F.L.(3d) 345, refd to. [para. 39].

Lodge v. Lodge (1993), 31 B.C.A.C. 72; 50 W.A.C. 72; 79 B.C.L.R.(2d) 360; 48 R.F.L.(3d) 365 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 39].

Mallen v. Mallen (1992), 11 B.C.A.C. 262; 22 W.A.C. 262; 65 B.C.L.R.(2d) 241; 40 R.F.L.(3d) 114 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40].

Moore v. Moore, [1998] B.C.J. No. 740 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 41].

Taylor v. Taylor et al. (1998), 104 B.C.A.C. 217; 170 W.A.C. 217; 50 B.C.L.R.(3d) 212; 157 D.L.R.(4th) 701; 38 R.F.L.(4th) 408 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].

Counsel:

C. Lewis, for the plaintiff;

Peter Kokkinis, in person.

This matter was heard on April 11-13 and June 13, 2000, at Vancouver, B.C., before Lynn Smith, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on August 22, 2000.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.