Spousal support

Many Court of Appeals decisions on family law are so fact driven as to be unhelpful to anyone beyond the parties.

Today's decision in Rioux v. Rioux, 2009 ONCA 569 is not like that.

The Court restates the law relating to spousal support in a helpful fashion:

[36]          The principles and approach for determining spousal support are well-established in the case law:  see Bracklow v. Bracklow (1999), 169 D.L.R. (4th) 577 (S.C.C.), and Hickey v. Hickey (1999), 172 D.L.R. (4th) 577 (S.C.C.).  Spousal support is not merely a consideration of needs and means.  In determining the appropriate quantum of support, compensatory and non-compensatory considerations should be taken into account in an effort to equitably alleviate the adverse consequences of the marriage breakdown.

[37]          To determine the amount of support, the court should take into account the objectives of spousal support orders, as set out in section 15.2(6) of the Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.3 (2nd Supp.).  These objectives are to:

a)        recognize any economic advantages or disadvantages to the spouses arising from the marriage or its breakdown;

b)       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;

c)       relieve any economic hardship of the spouses arising from the breakdown of the marriage; and

d)       in so far as practicable, promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4

416 225 2777