Thompson v. Scullion, [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 73 (FD)

• Judge: Guerette, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: March 21, 2000
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 73 (FD)

Thompson v. Scullion, [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 73 (FD)

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[English language version only]

[Version en langue anglaise seulement]

Temp. Cite: [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) TBEd. MY.069

Renvoi temp.: [2000] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) TBEd. MY.069

John Charles Thompson (applicant) v. Patricia Scullion (respondent)

(FDSJ-69-00)

Indexed As: Thompson v. Scullion

Répertorié: Thompson v. Scullion

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Family Division

Judicial District of Saint John

Guerette, J.

May 16, 2000.

Summary:

Résumé:

A husband and wife separated. The hus­band paid support generally of $1,015.38 biweekly, tax deductible, pursuant to a do­mestic contract. Child support was not spec­ified. By an amendment to the contract, the husband agreed to increase support to $1,265.38 biweekly and pay the tuition costs and books of the wife and oldest son for three years. The husband was employed with a U.S. company in Florida. In divorce pro­ceedings, the wife sought, inter alia, to vary child and spousal support, asserting that the husband's income was greater than the Canadian equivalent of his U.S. income given his severance allowance from his former employer, his signing bonus and no personal income tax in Florida.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, held, inter alia, that the husband pay the following amounts: spousal support of $1,867.66/month; the wife's tuition costs for four years; and child support of $874/month.

Family Law - Topic 4006

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Effect of agreements - A husband paid support generally of $1,867.66/month and tuition costs of the wife and oldest son for three years while they attended com­munity college - The support was tax deductible by the husband - Child support was not specified in the agreement - In divorce proceedings, the wife sought to vary child and spousal support - The hus­band, who worked in Florida, earned the equivalent of $117,000 Canadian - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, ordered that the spousal support of $1,867.66/month remain the same and the husband pay tuition costs for the four years the wife would be attending the course - See paragraphs 14 to 19.

Family Law - Topic 4045.5

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Support guidelines - Calculation or attribu­tion of income - A husband paid support generally pursuant to domestic contract - The husband worked in Florida, earning $78,000 U.S. ($117,000 Canadian), plus a possible performance bonus, which he did not receive the previous year - In divorce proceedings, the wife sought, inter alia, to vary child support, asserting that the hus­band's income was greater than $117,000 given his severance allowance from his former employer, his signing bonus and no per­sonal income tax in Florida - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Fam­ily Division, calculated child support based on the $117,000 - The bonus and sever­ance allowance were not included in the husband's income because they were one time payments - The court did not consider the different tax levels because there was no analysis of the cost of living differences between New Brunswick and Florida - See paragraphs 7 to 10.

Droit de la famille - Cote 4006

Divorce - Mesures accessoires - Ordonnances alimentaires - Effet d'une entente - [Voir Family Law - Topic 4006 ].

Droit de la famille - Cote 4045.5

Divorce - Mesures accessoires - Ordonnances alimentaires - Ligne directrices sur les pensions alimentaires - Calcul ou attribution de revenu - Ordonnances ali­mentaires - Calcul ou attribution de revenu - [Voir Family Law - Topic 4045.5 ].

Cases Noticed:

Martin v. Martin (1995), 164 N.B.R.(2d) 370; 421 A.P.R. 370 (Q.B. Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 27].

Koberinski v. Koberinski (1995), 159 N.B.R.(2d) 286; 409 A.P.R. 286 (F.D.), refd to. [para. 28].

Counsel:

David M. Lutz, Q.C., for the applicant;

M.A. Holland, for the respondent.

This application was heard on March 21, 2000, by Guerette, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, Judicial District of Saint John, who delivered the following decision on May 16, 2000.