Focus On

Family Law - CHILD SUPPORT - Calculation or attribution of income - Financial disclosure - Practice and procedure - Orders - Variation or amendment of orders - Bars to application - Appeals

Thursday, March 02, 2017 @ 7:00 PM  


Appeal by the father from a chambers judgment refusing reduction of child support. Five months prior to the hearing that resulted in the judgment under appeal, the matter was adjourned sine die. The father was granted leave to return the matter to the chambers list once he provided his income tax documents for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015. Following the hearing, the chambers judge dismissed the father’s application on the basis of incomplete financial information. The chambers judge seized herself of all future applications by the father and directed him to seek permission prior to making any future applications. The father appealed on the basis the chambers judge was biased, the mother failed to provide her income tax information, and the ruling was made in the absence of submissions.

HELD: Appeal dismissed. The court file and proceedings record confirmed the father had a history of applying to reduce child support or arrears without providing complete tax information as required, or providing documentation that raised accuracy issues. At the time of the predicate application, the public and profession was advised of mandated disclosure rules in s. 21 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, and that they would be strictly enforced. The father’s application was non-compliant with s. 21 of the Guidelines when it was adjourned. The material filed upon return of the matter was non-compliant. The chambers judge made no error in exercising her discretion to dismiss the father’s application as procedurally non-compliant, and committed no error in seizing herself with respect to future applications and requiring leave. No reasonable apprehension of bias was established.