7,366
edits
Difference between revisions of "Basic Principles of Spousal Support"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Basic Principles of Spousal Support (view source)
Revision as of 22:32, 3 June 2015
, 22:32, 3 June 2015no edit summary
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
<blockquote><tt>In making an order [for spousal support] the court shall not take into consideration any misconduct of a spouse in relation to the marriage.</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>In making an order [for spousal support] the court shall not take into consideration any misconduct of a spouse in relation to the marriage.</tt></blockquote> | ||
The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 2006 ''[[Divorce Act]]'' case called ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1nmrd Leskun v. Leskun]'', [2006] | The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 2006 ''[[Divorce Act]]'' case called ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1nmrd Leskun v. Leskun]'', [2006] SCC 25 confirmed that the misconduct of the spouses must not be taken into consideration in making a decision about whether spousal support should be paid following the end of their marriage. But even in ''Leskun'', the court distinguished between ''misconduct itself'' and the ''effects of misconduct'' on the parties after separation: | ||
<blockquote><tt>21.There is, of course, a distinction between the emotional consequences of misconduct and the misconduct itself. The consequences are not rendered irrelevant because of their genesis in the other spouse’s misconduct. If, for example, spousal abuse triggered a depression so serious as to make a claimant spouse unemployable, the consequences of the misconduct would be highly relevant (as here) to the factors which must be considered in determining the right to support, its duration and its amount. The policy of the [''Divorce Act''] however, is to focus on the consequences of the spousal misconduct not the attribution of fault.</tt></blockquote> | |||
The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' takes a slightly different approach. Section 166 says this: | The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' takes a slightly different approach. Section 166 says this: | ||
| Line 96: | Line 98: | ||
<blockquote><blockquote><tt>(b) affects the ability to provide spousal support.</tt></blockquote></blockquote> | <blockquote><blockquote><tt>(b) affects the ability to provide spousal support.</tt></blockquote></blockquote> | ||
In other words, under the ''Family Law Act'', the court cannot consider misconduct in the relationship (the same as under the ''Divorce Act''), but the court can look at the parties' behaviour after they separate, | In other words, under the ''Family Law Act'', the court cannot consider misconduct in the relationship (the same as under the ''Divorce Act''), but the court can look at the effects of the parties' behaviour after they separate, as well as whether the recipient is doing the things that need to be done to become economically self-sufficient or the payor is doing things that undermine his or her ability to pay support. | ||
===Securing a spousal support obligation=== | ===Securing a spousal support obligation=== | ||
| Line 345: | Line 347: | ||
{{REVIEWED | reviewer = [[ | {{REVIEWED | reviewer = [[David Dundee]], March 26, 2015}} | ||
{{JP Boyd on Family Law Navbox|type=chapters}} | {{JP Boyd on Family Law Navbox|type=chapters}} | ||