Gelman Family Law Lawyers

Over 200+ 5-Star Google Reviews

Book Consult

Variation of Support in The Face of a Separation Agreement

Book Consult1-844-736-0200

Table of Contents

Variation of Support in The Face of a Separation Agreement

An Ontario court recently considered a spouse’s request to reduce the child support and spousal support obligations that had been set out in the parties’ separation agreement.

What Happened?

The parties began living together in June 1983, married in December 1985, separated in August 2009 and divorced in January 2012.

The parties had three children together: B, born in December 1992; S, born in March 1995; and R, born in September 1996. At the time of separation and throughout their childhood into adulthood, the children were homeschooled by the mother.

In December 2010, the parties entered into a separation agreement, which was drafted by accountants (not lawyers). The agreement provided that the parties agreed they had received independent legal advice, understood their respective rights and were executing the agreement voluntarily.

In December 2014, the father brought a motion to vary his child support and spousal support obligations.

The Law on Variation

The court began by outlining that, when a party is seeking to vary support and there is no previous court order (as was the case here), sections 15.1(4) and s. 15.2(4) of the Divorce Act direct the court to consider any agreement the parties made. That is, in such cases, the court must determine the extent to which the terms of an existing agreement should be incorporated into a formal order for support. The court must also assess the extent to which enforcement of the agreement still reflects the original intention of the parties and the extent to which it is still in substantial compliance with the objectives of the Divorce Act (which include the objectives of finality, certainty and autonomy).

The court emphasized that a fairly negotiated agreement that represents the intentions and expectations of the parties, and that complies substantially with the objectives of the Divorce Act as a whole, should receive considerable weight.

The Court’s Decision

Child Support

The mother argued that the father should pay child support for R until she turned 22, as R was born with a cleft palate.

The father testified that if the children continued to reside with their mother after they turned 18 years of age and were earning an income instead of going to school, he would have paid child support until B and S turned 20, and R turned 22. He argued, however, that given the circumstances, none of the children required child support. He pointed to the fact that the children had all worked or assisted with their mother’s venture over the years. Furthermore, B, who turned 20 in December 2012, lived alone in Toronto and worked as a manager of a youth centre café. Similarly, S, who turned 20 in March 2015, left the mother’s home in January 2015 and had taken on the role of business/financial advisor for his mother. Finally, R was teaching karate and selling some of her art work, and her cleft palate had been surgically repaired long ago.

The court indicated that although the provisions for child support in the agreement were unusual, they were clear. Finding that the children were adults and were self-sufficient – which was a change in circumstances, as defined by the parties’ separation agreement – the court terminated the father’s child support obligation (noting that child support for R would end in April 2018).

Spousal Support

The court stated that it had to balance the goal of preserving autonomy and certainty in its analysis regarding the father’s request to vary spousal support. It noted that the parties had agreed that the mother had been a stay-at-home mom and required spousal support at the time of separation, but that spousal support could be varied (or even terminated) if a court found a change in circumstances that would warrant such a variation.

The court concluded that the mother failed to provide adequate documentation to support her claim that she earned no income. The court indicated that since the time the separation agreement was entered into in December 2010, the mother had managed to reinvent herself as an entrepreneur. As a result, the court imputed an annual income of $160,000 to the mother since 2016.

Given that the mother was no longer a stay-at-home spouse and had nearly acquired the status of autonomy – which was again a change in circumstances, as defined by the parties’ separation agreement – the court fixed the father’s spousal support obligation in a declining fashion, so as to allow the mother to attain her full autonomy within the next five years.

Lessons Learned

When determining whether to vary a spouse’s support obligations, the court must consider the terms of a separation agreement and the extent to which it still reflects the original intention of the parties, as well as the objectives of the Divorce Act, including the principle that both parties require finality.

Varying your spousal support or child support obligations can be a daunting and complicated matter. If you need help or have questions about your separation or divorce, contact Gelman & Associates. Our knowledgeable, results-oriented lawyers seek to empower clients to make informed decisions following the breakdown of a relationship. In addition to our firm’s handbook on separation and divorce and numerous web-based resources, all prospective clients are given a comprehensive family law kit during their initial consultation, with detailed information and resources to help individuals understand and navigate the separation and divorce process.

With six offices throughout Aurora, Barrie, Downtown Toronto, Mississauga, North York and Scarborough, we are easily accessible by transit and off-highway. Our phone lines are open Monday to Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Call us at (416) 736-0200 or 1-844-736-0200, or contact us online for an initial consultation.

Written by Lisa Gelman

Senior Lawyer

Senior Lawyer Lisa Gelman has over 25 years of family law experience and founded Gelman & Associates to provide strategic legal counsel in family law matters concerning divorce, parenting, separation, and more.

Frequently Asked Questions - enforcement & modification orders

A restraining order in the context of family court is an order that prohibits the contact that one party can have with another. Based on the particulars of a given restraining order, it can prohibit direct and/or indirect contact, and require that the party against whom the restraining order has been taken out maintain a certain physical distance from the other party. In the family law context, a restraining order has to be requested by way of a motion brought at the court. The party seeking the order must provide affidavit evidence to substantiate the need for the restraining order. The party against whom the order is sought must likewise have an opportunity to argue his/her case, and to this end judges will usually ask that a motion for a restraining order be brought with notice to the other party.

If you believe that your restraining order is required immediately, you may bring an urgent, ex parte motion for same (ex parte means that the motion is brought without notice to the other party, who is not served with your motion materials and is not given notice that the motion will even be taking place). Because restraining orders can affect possession of the matrimonial home and parenting time, it is imperative that the party against whom the order is sought have the opportunity to make his or her own case. Accordingly, if a judge grants a restraining order brought on an urgent, ex parte motion, the judge will also order that the motion return in one week’s time so that the party against  whom the order has been granted may be  properly served with motions materials and  have an opportunity to defend the action.

Suppose one of the parents does not follow the court’s order. He or she may be called to court and explain why she wasn’t able to uphold the initial agreement. If his or her reason isn’t valid, the court may change the earlier deal, and it may favor the other parent.

Each province and territory in Canada has a maintenance enforcement program for family orders and agreements. Additionally, the federal government may refuse to issue a Canadian passport if the applicant is delinquent in child support payments. They also have the authority to garnish wages for the back payments owed. In the USA, the Office of Child Support Enforcement, which is part of the Administration for Children and Families in the Department of Health and Human Services, is now in charge of the federal child support enforcement program.

Ex parte motions provide an exemption to the principles of due process in emergencies by allowing you to petition the court without having to give notice or serve the other parties in your case. If the judge issues the ex parte order, it’s only for a limited time.

Yes, it is possible to change the initial terms of a separation agreement if you and your spouse agree to the changes and sign a written agreement to change the terms. If your spouse does not agree to change the terms, you can make a court application to change the separation agreement.

No matter what the circumstances surrounding your separation agreement are, our Toronto separation lawyers can help you make changes when you need to.

You can use this motion if you need to change your order. By filing this motion, you’re asking the court to change something in your final order. It would help if you showed that there has been a substantial change in circumstances since the last court order. You can’t file this motion just because you disagree with the order. You shouldn’t also file this motion too soon after the court releases the final order. If things have changed in your children’s lives, you can ask to modify the order based on those changes. Other samples you can change may include but not be limited to:

  • Spousal support
  • Decision-making issues for the children
  • Issues related to parenting time
  • Child support

If you deny court-approved parenting time, it could be a possibility. The court may find you in contempt. You may also have to compensate the other person for any lost parenting time or legal fees they had to pay to enforce the parenting arrangement.

If you get an order and want to change it, you first need to assess your relationship with the opposing party.
If you both agree, you can apply for a consent order and need not go to court. If you do not, you may seek help from mediators or counsellors who can help you talk things out. If you still do not agree after mediation, you will need to apply to the court to change the order.

Related Blogs

Family law is what we do

Read our recent blogs on enforcement & modification orders topics in Ontario.

View all blogs

Locations We Serve

Multiple offices to help serve you better

With numerous offices across Ontario, we make it easier for our clients to have access to our lawyers. Please note that offices marked with an (**) are satellite offices and require a consultation booked in advance. We are not able to accommodate walk-in appointments at these locations. Call us to book a free consultation today.

Still have family law questions?

Speak to a lawyer

If you need legal advice regarding enforcement & modification orders matters in Ontario, contact our Toronto family law lawyers for a free consultation. Some conditions may apply.

Book Your Consult