Our Calgary Shared Custody Child Support lawyers know that 50/50 shared parenting is becoming almost the default position in most provinces across Canada and certainly in BC. Our highly ranked* Calgary Shared Custody Child Support lawyers work from offices in downtown Calgary as well as across British Columbia.
*(Top Choice Award (2014, 2016, 2017), top rated reviews on Google, Yelp, threebestrated, lawerratingz.com).
Calgary Shared Custody Child Support Is Now Occurring More Frequently 403-444-5503
Alberta has been slower to embrace shared parenting but is now moving towards recognition of newer social science literature that shows children benefit from the ongoing active involvement of two loving and concerning parents. Lorne N. MacLean, QC heads our child focused parenting time and responsibilities team in Western Canada and was an early proponent of shared child parenting under the right circumstances. MacLean was also winning counsel in Young v. Young, Canada’s leading case on child custody and the “maximum contact principle”.
Calgary Shared Custody Child Support Involves Different Rules
Calgary Shared Custody Child Support means the rules for child support change. There is an increased focus on the budgets in each household and increased costs associated with shared parenting need to be looked at. Never accept that someone who wants to be an active part of their child’s life is doing it to save money. Any support saved is offset by increased direct child costs in their own home. Click here to make sure you don’t lose hundreds if not thousands on your taxes in a shared custody arrangement.
Calgary Shared Custody Child Support Requires Proof The Parenting Time Is Really Shared
Before you get to calculating what child support should be paid each month, you need to prove you have shared Calgary parenting or shared Calgary child custody.
The recent 2017 Alberta Court of Appeal decision of Mackenzie v MacKenzie 2017 ABCA 71 rejected a husband’s attempt to get credit for shared custody and how it affects child support on the basis he didn’t meet the 40% threshold of time sharing to qualify for section 9 offset or reduced child support.
Calgary Shared Custody Child Support Section 9 Child Support Guidelines
Section 9 of the Guidelines reads as follows:
Shared custody
9 Where a spouse exercises a right of access to, or has physical custody of, a child for not less than 40 per cent of the time over the course of a year, the amount of the child support order must be determined by taking into account
(a) the amounts set out in the applicable tables for each of the spouses;
(b) the increased costs of shared custody arrangements; and
(c) the conditions, means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse and of any child for whom support is sought.
Payor Bears The Onus In Calgary Shared Custody Child Support Cases
9 We are of the view that the onus is on the parent seeking relief in reliance upon s. 9 of the Guidelines. See: Lavoie v. Wills, 2000 ABQB 1014at para.
119. In the case at bar, that evidentiary and legal burden was not met by the appellant.
Ways To Determine If Calgary Shared Custody Child Support Applies
So, since the Alberta Court of Appeal referred us to the Lavoie v. Wills decision we extracted what criteria are used to see if you are really sharing custody in Calgary:
119 The cases that interpret the 40% rule in s. 9 make it clear that:
-it is the time with the non-primary care parent that must equal 40% plus – Yaremchuk v. Yaremchuk (1998), 38 R.F.L. (4th) 312 (Alta. Q.B. [In Chambers]) (Clarke J.), relying upon Meloche v. Kales (1997), 35 O.R. (3d) 688 (Ont. Gen. Div.) (Cusinato J.); and Kolada [Kolada v. Kolada ((May 18, 1999)), Doc. Edmonton 4803-100266 (Alta. Q.B.), 1999 CarswellAlta 1402], at para. 15, relying upon Giene v. Giene (1998), 234 A.R. 355 (Alta. Q.B.) (Binder J.); Gore-Hickman v. Gore-Hickman (1999), 177 D.L.R. (4th) 222 (Sask. Q.B.) (Laing J.), relying on Kolada, and others;
-the time is not just the physical time with the parent but the time for which the parent is responsible for the child – Hamm v. Hamm ((April 3, 1998)), Doc. Prothonotary’s File 1201-49730/95 (N.S. S.C.) (Goodfellow J.), 1998 CarswellNS 156, at paras. 17 – 18;
-the onus is on the parent seeking a 40% declaration to prove that amount of time – Yaremchuk, quoting Meloche at 694; and Hamm, at para. 21; Rose v. Bulkowski (1999), 238 A.R. 345 (Alta. Q.B.) (Nation J.), where the father with 96% of the current income and 40% custody was ordered to pay approximately 80% of his Guideline chart amount;
-the consideration for a 50/50% sharing of custody, even where incomes are different, may be different than for a 40% sharing – Hunter v. Hunter (1998), 37 R.F.L. (4th) 260 (Ont. Gen. Div.) (Brockenshire J.); and
-consideration must be given to the “quality of time spent with each parent” – Dennett v. Dennett (1998), 61 Alta. L.R. (3d) 245 (Alta. Q.B.) (Romaine J.).
Counting hours will occur, figuring out when someone is in charge of a child dropped off at school until picked up by the other parent will occur as will a myriad of other calculations relating to who has responsibility for a child when they are with third parties!
