2,667
edits
Difference between revisions of "Changing Orders in Family Matters"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Changing Orders in Family Matters (view source)
Revision as of 21:38, 19 May 2013
, 21:38, 19 May 2013→Changing an order refusing support
| Line 257: | Line 257: | ||
It used to be the case that a claim for spousal support that was dismissed in a final judgment was permanently dismissed, such that any future application for support could not proceed, no matter how things might have changed for the person in financial need. | It used to be the case that a claim for spousal support that was dismissed in a final judgment was permanently dismissed, such that any future application for support could not proceed, no matter how things might have changed for the person in financial need. | ||
A 2003 judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, ''[http://canlii.ca/t/5cdj Gill-Sager v. Sager]'', 2003 BCCA 46, | A 2003 judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, ''[http://canlii.ca/t/5cdj Gill-Sager v. Sager]'', 2003 BCCA 46, called into question just how "final" final orders about spousal support should be. In that case, the court issued a strong caution to trial judges against permanently dismissing a spouse's claim for support. Subsequent cases have interpreted this decision to mean that spousal support claims should never be permanently dismissed, only adjourned, so that it will always be open to a spouse to apply for spousal support later on. In practice this means that final orders should not say that a claim for support is ''dismissed'' but is only ''adjourned generally''; in other words, they should say that the issue is not decided. | ||
In practice this means that final orders should not say that a claim for support is ''dismissed'' but is only ''adjourned generally'' | |||
A party who seeks spousal support after a judgment dismissing support must be able to establish a significant change in his or her financial circumstances, such that if the change were known of at the time of trial, the judge would have made a different decision. For example, a party who develops a serious, disabling illness following trial — a trial held while the party was in perfect health — and can no longer hold a job, might be entitled to apply for spousal support when the illness is discovered. | A party who seeks spousal support after a judgment dismissing support must be able to establish a significant change in his or her financial circumstances, such that if the change were known of at the time of trial, the judge would have made a different decision. For example, a party who develops a serious, disabling illness following trial — a trial held while the party was in perfect health — and can no longer hold a job, might be entitled to apply for spousal support when the illness is discovered. | ||
