Lavie v. Lavie, 2018 ONCA 10
The case Lavie v. Lavie, 2018 ONCA 10, revolves around a dispute between Kevin and Tanya Lavie, a divorced couple, over various aspects of their divorce. These aspects include the division of their property, the allocation of child support for their two children, and the determination of spousal support.
One of the main issues in the case was the imputation of income. The trial judge had made the decision to impute income to Kevin, who was unemployed at the time, while deciding not to impute any additional income to Tanya, who had chosen to earn less by running a child play center instead of returning to her more lucrative teaching career. This decision had a significant impact on the determination of child and spousal support obligations, with Kevin being ordered to pay both. These obligations weighed heavily on Kevin, leading him to challenge the imputation of income during the appeal.
Upon reviewing the case, the Court of Appeal partially agreed with Kevin's arguments. They concurred with Kevin's assertion that the trial judge had erred in his approach to the imputation of income. They found that the trial judge had made a mistake by imputing income to Kevin, who was unemployed at the time, while not imputing any additional income to Tanya, who was earning less than she could.
Given this error, the Court of Appeal decided to adjust the child and spousal support obligations that were originally determined by the trial judge. They made the decision to reduce these obligations to zero as of January 1, 2013. This decision had a significant impact on Kevin's financial responsibilities, effectively relieving him of the child and spousal support obligations that had previously been imposed on him.
The Court of Appeal included a provision for the potential review of these support obligations. This review would be based on any relevant changes in circumstances since the trial. This provision opens a potential avenue for either Kevin or Tanya to request a review of the support terms, should there be a significant change in their respective situations. This could include a range of scenarios such as changes in employment status, income, or other substantial changes in their financial circumstances. In essence, the Court of Appeal's decision offered flexibility and the opportunity for future adjustments to the child and spousal support obligations, reflecting the evolving circumstances of the parties involved.
Lavie v. Lavie, 2018 ONCA 10 illustrates the complexity of determining child support. It is a decision that requires a delicate balance between the parents' financial abilities and the children's needs. Particularly in cases where parents' incomes fluctuate or change over time, the court must revisit and adjust child support obligations to ensure that they continue to serve the best interests of the children.
THIS BLOG IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND DOES NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF LAILNA DHALIWAL LLP.
The Content is offered free of charge strictly on an "as is" basis and is intended to provide users with general information only. Lailna Dhaliwal LLP does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, completeness or fitness of the Content for any particular purpose.
The material provided on the Lailna Dhaliwal LLP/JSDLAW PC website is not intended to provide legal advice or opinions of any kind, and does not constitute legal advice.
No one should act, or refrain from acting, based solely upon the materials provided on this website, without first seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice.
Sending or receiving of these materials does not create a lawyer-client relationship.
Do not provide any confidential information to Lailna Dhaliwal LLP unless and until we have given you a written retainer agreement confirming that we can represent you.