2,443
edits
Difference between revisions of "Basic Principles of Spousal Support"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
Basic Principles of Spousal Support (view source)
Revision as of 23:41, 17 April 2013
, 23:41, 17 April 2013→Introduction
Gayla Reid (talk | contribs) m |
Gayla Reid (talk | contribs) m (→Introduction) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
#a spouse has suffered economic loss or hardship as a result of the relationship or the breakdown of the relationship, | #a spouse has suffered economic loss or hardship as a result of the relationship or the breakdown of the relationship, | ||
#there is a contract between the spouses | #there is a contract between the spouses that requires that spousal support be paid, or | ||
# | #a spouse is in financial need after separation and the other spouse | ||
has the ability and disposable income to meet that need. | |||
A person claiming spousal support in court will generally wind up making his or her application based on one of these grounds. In determining whether the ground has been proven, the court will look at the factors and requirements set out in the relevant legislation. | A person claiming spousal support in court will generally wind up making his or her application based on one of these grounds. In determining whether the ground has been proven, the court will look at the factors and requirements set out in the relevant legislation. | ||
| Line 34: | Line 35: | ||
#the parties lived in a marriage-like relationship for less than two years and have a child together. | #the parties lived in a marriage-like relationship for less than two years and have a child together. | ||
Married spouses must start a court proceeding claiming spousal support within two years of the date of their ''divorce'' or an order ''annulling'' their marriage. Unmarried spouses must start a court proceeding within two years of the date of their ''separation'' | Married spouses must start a court proceeding claiming spousal support within two years of the date of their ''divorce'' or an order ''annulling'' their marriage. Unmarried spouses must start a court proceeding within two years of the date of their ''separation''. | ||
The objectives that the court will look at in deciding whether a spouse is entitled to spousal support are set out at s. 161 of the ''[[Family Law Act]]''. If a spouse is entitled to spousal support, the factors that the court will review to determine the amount of support and the length of time for which it should be paid are set out in s. 162. The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' objectives and factors for spousal support are the same as the ''[[Divorce Act]]'' objectives and factors, and the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines may also be used to help decide how much support should be paid and for how long it should be paid. | (The ''[[Divorce Act]]'' doesn't have any rule about when an application for support can be brought following divorce; under that law, a spouse is always a spouse entitled to apply for support.) | ||
The objectives that the court will look at in deciding whether a spouse is entitled to spousal support are set out at s. 161 of the ''[[Family Law Act]]''. If a spouse is entitled to spousal support, the factors that the court will review to determine the amount of support and the length of time for which it should be paid are set out in s. 162. | |||
The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' objectives and factors for spousal support are the same as the ''[[Divorce Act]]'' objectives and factors, and the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines may also be used to help decide how much support should be paid and for how long it should be paid. | |||
===June and Ward Cleaver: An explanation of spousal support=== | ===June and Ward Cleaver: An explanation of spousal support=== | ||
| Line 47: | Line 52: | ||
<blockquote>Skip forward a few years. Ward discovers that June's relationship with the mail carrier isn't quite as businesslike as he'd thought. Ward and June separate, Wally moves in with his girlfriend and the Beaver stays with June in the former family home. Ward moves into a new apartment with his secretary.</blockquote> | <blockquote>Skip forward a few years. Ward discovers that June's relationship with the mail carrier isn't quite as businesslike as he'd thought. Ward and June separate, Wally moves in with his girlfriend and the Beaver stays with June in the former family home. Ward moves into a new apartment with his secretary.</blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>As a result of the way that Ward and June handled their marriage, Ward has been allowed to pursue a successful career and earn lots of money. Ward is in a great position to move on with his life.</blockquote> | <blockquote>As a result of the way that Ward and June handled their marriage, Ward has been allowed to pursue a successful career and earn lots of money. Ward is in a great position to move on with his life.</blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>June, however, isn't so lucky. Her research skills from her work at NASA are obsolete, her master's degree in orbital dynamics isn't relevant any more, and she has no idea how to operate the fancy new equipment that NASA has bought since she last worked there. Making matters worse, the last entry on her resume is fifteen years old. If June's going to go back to work, it won't be at NASA, it'll be at | <blockquote>June, however, isn't so lucky. Her research skills from her work at NASA are obsolete, her master's degree in orbital dynamics isn't relevant any more, and she has no idea how to operate the fancy new equipment that NASA has bought since she last worked there. Making matters worse, the last entry on her resume is fifteen years old. If June's going to go back to work, it won't be at NASA, it'll be at Tim Horton's.</blockquote> | ||
In this example, June has been financially disadvantaged as a result of the marriage. While Ward is in good shape and his career shows no sign of decline, June has no way to easily re-enter the workforce because her job skills are out of date. Of course, they have two great kids, but the best job June will be able to get will be as a Tim Horton's trainee, and that won't pay enough to cover the cost of the mortgage, the gas bill, the phone bill and all of life's sundry other expenses. | In this example, June has been financially disadvantaged as a result of the marriage. While Ward is in good shape and his career shows no sign of decline, June has no way to easily re-enter the workforce because her job skills are out of date. Of course, they have two great kids, but the best job June will be able to get will be as a Tim Horton's trainee, and that won't pay enough to cover the cost of the mortgage, the gas bill, the phone bill and all of life's sundry other expenses. | ||
| Line 61: | Line 66: | ||
===Spousal support, fault and misconduct=== | ===Spousal support, fault and misconduct=== | ||
Divorce in Canada has been "no-fault" since the ''[[Divorce Act]]'' was updated in 1968, and the ''Family Relations Act'' followed suit when it was introduced in 1972. A ''no-fault'' system means that the conduct of the spouses during their relationship and the reasons why their relationship has ended have nothing to do with whether spousal support is payable, how the children wind up being cared for, or how property and debt are divided. Whether someone was abusive or a cheater, for example, is not relevant to the court's consideration of these issues. In fact, s. 15.2(5) of the ''[[Divorce Act]]'' says: | Divorce in Canada has been "no-fault" since the ''[[Divorce Act]]'' was updated in 1968, and the ''Family Relations Act'' followed suit when it was introduced in 1972. | ||
A ''no-fault'' system means that the conduct of the spouses during their relationship and the reasons why their relationship has ended have nothing to do with whether spousal support is payable, how the children wind up being cared for, or how property and debt are divided. Whether someone was abusive or a cheater, for example, is not relevant to the court's consideration of these issues. In fact, s. 15.2(5) of the ''[[Divorce Act]]'' says: | |||
<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> | ||