Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support Alert
Our top rated family lawyers warn that, clients and nonspecialist lawyers dabbling in family law, must be very aware of the Vancouver cross over spousal support issue before settling their spousal support cases. Many clients and lawyers are aware we have 2 formulas for calculating spousal support under the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines. However, Vancouver cross over spousal support requires a changeover from the with child formula for calculation support to the without child formula for calculating spousal support. Sadly, many clients and non specialized lawyers are completely unaware of Vancouver cross over spousal support principles. This can lead to disastrous results for a recipient spouse in a medium to long marriage because of a failure to properly consider Vancouver cross over spousal support issues. Fatal errors can also occur in lump sum support calculations if you don’t properly consider Vancouver cross over spousal support. Don’t make the biggest mistake of your life call us now at 1-877-602-9900 in Calgary, Vancouver or any of our 4 other offices in Surrey, Richmond, Kelowna and Fort St John BC.
Don’t Make A Huge Mistake And Forget About The Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support Issue
As Vancouver Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support lawyers, we warn spouses who have children of medium to long marriages to be aware that spousal support amounts are reduced by the child support paid because spousal support is factored in AFTER child support is calculated as paid. Good Vancouver spousal support lawyers will explain to their clients that child support takes priority over spousal support. In cases where the paying spouse’s income is modest spousal support can be zero after child support is calculated and paid. But after child support ends spousal support should be payable in many cases and for a significant period of time. In medium to long duration marriages our Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support are aware that a cross over of support formula occurs when all children are adults and no more child support is payable. Our Vancouver Richmond Spousal support lawyers also know that spousal support should increase as each child becomes independent and child support declines until all children are adults when it ceases completely. A top Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support lawyer will have reviews of spousal support as part of a court order or settlement to ensure spousal support isn’t zero when the SSAG say it should be paid as child support is reduced towards zero.
Don’t Make A Huge Lump Sum Spousal Support Mistake Regarding Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support
Many clients and non specialist family lawyers need to understand that lump sum spousal support calculations need to factor the crucial Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support factor into any settlement or court case. Regular reviews need to be specified to coincide with children graduating from high school or university or thousands of dollars could be lost by the recipient spouse.
Spousal Support Might Have to Exceed Maximum Time Limits
The Author’s of the SSAG point out that “The without child support formula will be used to redetermine the amount of spousal support after all children are grown up. If the amount of spousal support was inadequate in the past because of the priority to child support, spousal support may have to continue beyond the maximum time limits generated by the formula in order to adequately satisfy the recipient’s compensatory claims.
Recent Case Correctly Applies Vancouver Cross Over Spousal Support Formula And Correctly Has Review Of Support When Child Support Ceases
In this week’s case of Ashak v. Ashak the court noted that child support payments led to no spousal support being payable but the judge was aware that in the future the children would become independent and then spousal support would be payable on either of the with or without child support formula. Firstly the court dealt with the wife’s contribution to the husband’s career and her own career loss on an equal division of the family property and then the court looked at spousal support and noted a review would need to occur to ensure the spousal support took into account Vancouver cross over spousal support.
[37] In Nearing v. Sauer, 2015 BCSC 58 at para. 141, the court outlines that s. 95(2) of the Family Law Act allows the court to consider a spouse’s contribution to the career or career potential of the other spouse or a spouse’s detrimental impact on to the value of family property or potential family property, which focuses on the spouse’s direct actions vis-à-vis the value of family property.
[38] I accept Mrs. Ashak’s submissions that she interrupted her career to stay at home and raise the children. Rather than return to work as a legal assistant, she sought alternate work which would permit her to continue to perform her household duties, first as a realtor and later as an insurance agent. Mr. Ashak’s career as a truck driver was not affected as Mrs. Ashak’s was.
[39] I am thus satisfied that by assuming the responsibility as she did for caring for the children in the household, Mrs. Ashak relieved Mr. Ashak of the responsibility for doing so and contributed to his career. By staying at home and taking the career adjustments which she did, her earnings were negatively affected. However, I am not satisfied that in the circumstances of this family, it would be significantly unfair to divide the family property equally. Both parties worked for most of the marriage and earned relatively modest incomes.
Spousal Support
[48] Section 15.2 of the Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp), and ss. 160, 161, 162 and 165 of the Family Law Act confers the court jurisdiction to make an order for spousal support. Both acts provide objectives for such orders, including the need to recognize any economic advantages or disadvantages to the spouses arising from the marriage or its breakdown (Divorce Act, s. 15.2(6)(a); Family Law Act, s. 161(a)) and to apportion between the spouses any financial consequences arising from the care of any child of the marriage over and above any obligation for the support of any child of the marriage (Divorce Act, s. 15.2(6)(b); Family Law Act, s. 161(b)).
[49] Both likewise provide that the court is required to take into consideration the condition, means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse, including the length of time the spouses cohabited and the functions performed by each spouse during cohabitation (Divorce Act, ss. 15.2(4)(a) and (b); Family Law Act, ss. 162(a) and (b)).
[50] Compensatory support is intended to provide redress to the recipient spouse for economic disadvantage arising from the marriage or the receipt of an economic advantage upon the other spouse: Chutter v. Chutter, 2008 BCCA 507 at para. 50. As stated in Moge v. Moge, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 813 at 867-68, the most significant economic consequence of marriage or marriage breakdown usually arises from having children, where a wife is generally required to leave or cut back her participation in the workforce in order to care for the children.
[51] Mr. and Mrs. Ashak cohabited for 20 years. Mrs. Ashak left full-time employment after the birth of their second child. She has worked reduced hours to keep up with her child-care duties. Her doing so has contributed to Mr. Ashak’s business. She is entitled to compensatory spousal support.
[52] With respect to spousal support, based on their current incomes as determined, the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines suggest no payment to Mrs. Ashak. However, that amount is limited by the priority of child support, which leaves no funds available for support to Mrs. Ashak. Considering the duration of 9.5 to 19 years suggested by the Guidelines, it is likely Mrs. Ashak’s entitlement will continue past the time the children are no longer children of the marriage. Given the uncertainty of this date, the order will provide for a review of the quantum and continuing duration of spousal support, if any, when the children are no longer children of the marriage.
