Telles-Langdon v. Ashford, 2010 ONCA 509, released today, gives a good review of the law relating to when retroactive support will be payable. The Court held:
[6] With respect to the support award retroactive from August 5, 2008 to July 7, 2007, the trial judge considered only the conduct of the appellant. He did not consider the other factors articulated by the Supreme Court for determining retroactive support in D.B.S. v S.R.G., [2006] 2 S.C.R. 231: (1) unreasonably delay by the recipient parent in applying for the retroactive support; (2) conduct of the payor spouse; (3) circumstances of the child; and (4) hardship occasioned by the retroactive award. Furthermore, it appears that he did not impute income to the respondent during this period, although he found it was appropriate to impute income to her and did so for subsequent periods.
1 comment:
This is interesting. A woman can find herself pregnant, hide the fact from the father and then try to claim retroactive support. Where is the fairness, the equality under the law?
I propose a law that would level the playing field for the genders. Just as a woman has the absolute right to decide if she is emotionally, financially, or socially ready for parenthood it is only fair to give men the same freedom. As a woman can decide to abort any time up until the birth of the child I propose that men, upon being informed of their potential (or actual in the case of late notification) parenthood, be given a 9 month period during which they may make a representation to the court to terminate their parental rights and responsibilities. This seems to me to be the only way to allow men equal treatment under the present law.
This law should include a severe financial penalty for fathers who act as a parent after termination of rights and responsibilities and a clause reducing the length of time to decide should Canada ever restrict the period in which abortion is allowed.
Post a Comment