Lorne N. MacLean, QC leads our top rated* team of Vancouver Calgary Support Variation Lawyers. Our skilled Vancouver Calgary Support Variation Lawyers know changes in income up or down and efforts to move towards self sufficiency or lack of same matter in a spousal support and child support variation case. Hiring one of our tireless and experienced Vancouver Calgary Support Variation Lawyers is also critical.
*(Top Choice Award (2014, 2016, 2017), top rated reviews on Google, Yelp, threebestrated, lawerratingz.com).
Vancouver Calgary Support Variation Lawyers – What is The Test To vary Support?
Our firm has offices located across BC in Vancouver, Surrey, Richmond, Kelowna and Fort St John as well as in downtown Calgary. We will meet with you promptly if you need skilled Vancouver Calgary Support Variation Lawyers to help you in a spousal support or child support variation case.
The test for varying support requires a significant threshold be met before a change in the amount or how long support is paid is made. This change could involve changes in either spouse’s income, remarriage a child finishing school, job loss, retirement, inheritances etc.
Recent cuts in jobs in Calgary have really ramped up stress on paying spouses and they need to act quickly to reduce support or they may be left out in the cold. Conversely, some spouses have had huge income gains that they may not have disclosed which demand an increase in child and spousal support.
Delay in applying almost always leads to prejudice to the person alleging the significant change. Don’t be one of those people who loses financially because of inaction.
Pick up the phone today and call us at 1-877-602-9900.
Recent BCCA Support Variation Case Explains Test
Our team of Vancouver Calgary Support Variation Lawyers thought potential family clients could take advantage of the knowledge distilled on the thorny topic of variations of support in the recent BC Court of Appeal case of J.W.M. v. J.L.M. 2016 BCCA 478 which states:
Summary:
The parties were married for eight years. After eight years of separation in which the court gave considerable latitude on the question of imputing income to the wife, who was qualified in several occupations, a judge reduced spousal support to reflect the husband’s reduced income and income he imputed to the wife on an increasing trajectory that allowed for gradual buildup of earnings. The wife appealed. Held: appeal dismissed. The appellant did not establish an error in the judge’s approach to the application, or the exercise of his judgment.
[7] The judge found that J.W.M. had satisfied the burden upon him under s. 17(7) of the Divorce Act to establish a material change of circumstances, re-set J.W.M.’s income for Guidelines purposes as I have described, and imputed the income of which J.L.M. complains in this appeal. In setting spousal support he said:
[68] After considering the applicable provisions of the DA and the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines [SSAG], I have determined that the claimant will pay monthly spousal support of $1,500. The amount payable, assuming child support of $1,500 and income imputed to the respondent of $15,000, ranges from a low of $1,197, medium $1,660, and a high of $1,963. The low equally divides net disposable income. The mid-range shows a 3% disparity in favour of the respondent. The median between the low range figure and the midrange figure is $1,428. I set spousal support at $1,500, not taking into account 75% of s. 7 medical and dental expenses paid by the claimant, which may be deducted, as stated earlier in these reasons.
In Powell v. Levesque, 2014 BCCA 33, Madam Justice Smith for the court addressed the requirement for a material change of circumstances:
[23] In L.M.P. v. L.S., 2011 SCC 64, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 775, a decision that was rendered after the decision under appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada reiterated the two-fold test for variation of a support order under the Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2d Supp.) from Willick v. Willick, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 670 (for child support orders) and G.(L.) v. B.(G.), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 370, (for spousal support orders). The Court stated:
[31] Willick described the proper analysis as requiring a court to “determine first, whether the conditions for variation exist and if they do exist what variation of the existing order ought to be made in light of the change in circumstances” (p. 688). In determining whether the conditions for variation exist, the court must be satisfied that there has been a change of circumstance since the making of the prior order or variation. The onus is on the party seeking a variation to establish such a change.
[32] That “change of circumstances”, the majority of the Court concluded in Willick, had to be a “material” one, meaning a change that, “if known at the time, would likely have resulted in different terms” (p. 688). G.(L.) confirmed that this threshold also applied to spousal support variations.
[24] The Court added that whether a material change of circumstances has been demonstrated will depend on the actual circumstances of the parties at the time of the order (para. 34) and in general will require some degree of continuity, not merely a temporary set of circumstances (para. 35).
To find out if the change of circumstances since the original support order justify an increase or decrease in spousal or child support all you have to do is meet promptly with one of our Vancouver Calgary Support Variation Lawyers.
Click here to complete an online form to meet with us or call us at 1-877-602-9000 toll free to get justice.
