D. Terms, Conditions, and Restrictions

Author:Julien D. Payne - Marilyn A. Payne
Pages:237-238
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 237

Pursuant to section 15.2(3) of the Divorce Act, a court may order spousal support for a definite or indefinite period or until a specified event occurs, and the court may impose terms, conditions, and restrictions on its order.144

Page 238

In appropriate circumstances, periodic spousal support may be ordered for the lifetime of the payee and made binding on the obligor’s estate.145In

the absence of any specific direction that the order shall survive the death of the payor, a spousal order terminates on the death of either spouse.146

[144] See, generally, Re Muslake and Muslake (1987), 58 OR (2d) 615 (UFC); see also Torres v Marin, [2007] YJ No 94 (SC) (obligor to pay periodic spousal support while earning employment income); Lockyer v Lockyer, [2000] OJ No 2939 (Sup Ct) (order for periodic spousal support declared subject to conditions whereby amount payable would be unaffected by either spouse earning an annual income below a specified amount). As to child support orders, see Divorce Act, RSC 1985 (2d Supp), c 3, s 15.1(4), as amended by SC 1997, c 1.

[145] See Waters v Conrod, 2007 BCCA 1024. See also Section C(5), above in this chapter; Katz v Katz (1983), 33 RFL (2d) 412 (Man CA), additional reasons (1983), 25 Man R (2d) 57 (CA); Milton v Milton, 2008 NBCA 87; Celeste v Celeste, 2013 NBQB 41; Connelly v Connelly (1974), 16 RFL 171 (NSCA); Linton v Linton (1990), 30 RFL (3d) 1 (Ont CA); Katz v Katz, 2014 ONCA 606 (child support); Droit de la famille - 707, [1989] RDF 614 (Que CA); compare Hillhouse v Hillhouse (1992), 43 RFL (3d) 266 (BCCA); Donald v Donald (1991), 33 RFL (3d) 196 at 217 (NSCA); and see contra: Carmichael v Carmichael (1992), 43 RFL (3d) 145 (NSCA); see also Lippolt v Lippolt Estate, 2015 ABQB 118; Ross v Ross (1994), 7 RFL (4th) 146 (BCCA); Sinclair v McAuley, 2012 MBCA 86; Pick v Pick (1987), 11 RFL (3d) 14 (Sask QB), var’d (1990), 25 RFL (3d) 331 (Sask CA).

[146] Despot v Despot Estate (1992), 42 RFL (3d) 218 (BCSC); Terry v Terry Estate (1994), 1 BCLR (3d) 299 (SC) (specific direction found in this case); Finnie v Rae (1977), 16 OR (2d) 54 (HCJ); Katz v Katz, 2014 ONCA 606; compare Family Law Act, SBC 2011, c 25, sections 170-171; Joffres v Joffres...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP