Skip to content

Learn more about Ontario Divorce.

Ontario Divorce
Ontario Divorce
Child Support
Child Support
Child Custody
Child Custody
Property Division
Property Division
Spousal Support
Spousal Support
Collaborative Divorce
Collaborative Divorce
Separation Agreements
Separation Agreements
Adultery
Adultery
Passports
Passports
Tax Implications of Divorce
Tax Implications of Divorce
Spousal Spying
Spousal Spying
Selling the Home
Selling the Home
Ontario Divorce Help FAQ
Ontario Divorce Help FAQ
Domestic Violence
Domestic Violence
Changing the Locks
Changing the Locks
Texting & Divorce
Texting & Divorce
YouTube
YouTube
Our Story
Our Story

New Trial Ordered for Ottawa Rec-League Hockey Player Convicted of Aggravated Assault

slap shot

New Trial Ordered for Ottawa Rec-League Hockey Player Convicted of Aggravated Assault

Summer is almost officially over; if you are a parent, that means it’s back to the routine of kids school and activities.

For many Canadian parents, it means a return to kids’ hockey, which has had its share of controversy in the past few years. Among many other things, the sport is criticized for its inherent violence, for attracting overzealous coaches and parents, and for implicitly fostering aggressive unsportsmanlike conduct in its young players.
But the criticisms levelled against non-professional adult hockey are no different.

Late last year, we wrote about a case called R. v. McIsaac, which involved the criminal conviction of an Ottawa adult recreational hockey player in a men’s no-contact league. He was convicted of aggravated assault after delivering an on-ice “blindside” hit to an opposing player in the last 47 seconds of the game. The other player suffered a major concussion, soft tissue neck and spine injuries, facial scars, and several broken teeth, and endured some permanent, debilitating injuries.

In a decision handed down this week, the Ontario Court of Appeal has granted the convicted player a new trial, on the basis that the trial judge had “improperly used [her] hockey sense to convict him”. In particular, the Appeal Court found that in making her ruling – and particularly in concluding that the play in question was an intentional, retaliatory blindside hit — the judge had made certain presumptions about hockey strategy. However, as the Court pointed out: “From the sports pages to social media, it is abundantly clear that reasonable Canadians often disagree about what constitutes a rational hockey strategy in a given situation.”

This amounted to what the Court of Appeal called “impermissible speculative reasoning” on the trial judge’s part, to the extent that she “appear[ed] to impose her personal knowledge of hockey on the facts of the case.”

For the full text of the decisions, see:

R. v. MacIsaac, 2015 ONCA 587 (CanLII)

R. v. MacIsaac, 2013 ONCJ 787 (CanLII)

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com.

Finding A Lawyer- video

  

 

Wednesday’s Video Clip: Finding A Lawyer

In this video Kiley talks about the various ways people can find a lawyer to help them, including:

Community Legal Clinics

Community legal clinics provide legal services to low-income people in areas such as housing, employment insurance, income support, immigration, human rights, and workers’ compensation. Some clinics also provide assistance with wills, powers of attorney, and education law. To find the community legal clinic nearest you, visit the Legal Aid Ontario web site or call Legal Aid Ontario.

Law Office of Russell I Alexander, Family Lawyers

This law firm focuses exclusively on family law. Russell I Alexander offers pre-separation legal advice and helps clients who are going through a separation and/or a divorce. This office assists clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. Their lawyers negotiate settlements for their clients, and if a fair and reasonable settlement cannot be achieved they prepare and argue motions and trials.
866-647-6335.

www.russellalexander.com

Law Society of Upper Canada

Offers information on finding and working with a lawyer, web site:
www.lsuc.on.ca

Legal Advice for Victims of Domestic Violence

Legal Aid Ontario can provide authorization for a two-hour consultation with a family law lawyer through a form called “Advice Lawyer Family Violence Authorization”.

Community legal clinics, student legal aid societies, and women’s shelters should have these forms to give to abused women. Contact the women’s shelter in your community or call Legal Aid Ontario for the phone number and location of the legal clinic or student legal aid society nearest you.

Legal Aid Ontario

1-800-668-8258 (bilingual)

www.legalaid.on.ca

Office of the Children’s Lawyer

Provides court-appointed legal representation for children up to 18 years of age, call:
416-314-8000 (bilingual – accepts collect calls)

Legal and Family Resources

Advocacy Centre for the Elderly

Provides legal advice and information to low-income seniors 60 years of age and older on issues such as elder abuse, home care, nursing homes and homes for the aged, and powers of attorney; phone and web site:
416-598-2656

www.advocacycentreelderly.org

ARCH Disability Law Centre

Provides legal information to people with disabilities, and some representation in precedent-setting cases involving disability issues. ARCH has an accessible library of materials on disability-related issues that is open to the public; phone and web site:
1-866-482-2724

www.archdisabilitylaw.ca

Centre for Addiction and Mental Health

Provides support, treatment, and education for people with mental health and addiction problems and their families. Publications on youth and addiction, and information on drug and alcohol policies in Ontario schools are available through their web site:
1-800-463-6273 (bilingual)

www.camh.net/index.html

CLEO (Community Legal Education Ontario / Éducation juridique communautaire Ontario)

Provides clear language legal education and information materials for low-income and disadvantaged people in Ontario. CLEO’s materials address issues in many areas of law, including family, domestic violence, social assistance, housing, and immigration and refugee law. Most materials are also available in French. All print publications are free and can be viewed online.

416-408-4420 (accepts collect calls)

www.cleo.on.ca

CLEONet

An online collection of public legal education resources for community workers.

What Kinds of Things “Shock the Conscience of the Court”?

gasp

What Kinds of Things “Shock the Conscience of the Court”?

When it comes to dividing up the assets of a divorcing couple, one of the basic premises in Ontario family law is that equalization should usually proceed on 50/50 basis, i.e. that there should be an equal division of Net Family Property (NFP).

However – as with so many general rules in family law – there are always exceptions. The Family Law Act, in section 5(6), expressly allows a court to award more or less than half the difference in the NFP in cases where to do otherwise would be “unconscionable”, after considering a lengthy list of factors.

In a case called Serra v. Serra, the Ontario Court of Appeal stated the threshold of what is considered “unconscionable” is exceptionally high, and that circumstances which are merely “unfair’, “harsh” or “unjust” do not meet the test. Nor does an “inequitable” situation between the spouses necessarily amount to an “unconscionable” one, and there is no requirement to show that one of the spouses acted improperly..

Rather, in order to justify an unequal division of NFP, the court must find that to do otherwise (by granting equal division) would “shock the conscience of the court.”

So what sorts of things fall into this “conscience-shocking” category? There are many examples, all of which depend on their particular facts. But to provide a few illustrations, courts in the past have ordered unequal division of NFP where:

• One spouse failed to disclose pre-marriage debts and liabilities, even in a situation where the other spouse neglected to ask about them. (See Roseneck v. Gowling)

• One of the spouses racked up $13,000 in gambling debts. (See Naidoo v. Naidoo)

• The husband incurred debts at bars and with Escort Services. (See Abaza v. Abaza)

• One spouse paid his siblings $400,000 as a “reward” for helping conceal from the wife the fact that he had won $2.5 million in the lottery shortly before separation. (See Helmy v. Helm)

In all these cases, the court decided it would be “unconscionable” to the point of “shock[ing] the conscience of the court” to allow the NFP to be divided equally; the respective courts ordered an unequal division instead, tailored to the individual facts..

Next week, I’ll give you a few examples of cases where – despite some bad behaviour on the part of one of the spouses – the court nonetheless opted for a 50/50 split. Some of those may surprise you.

For the full text of these and other related decisions, see:

Serra v. Serra, 2009 ONCA 105

Arndt v. Arndt (1991), 1991 CanLII 7240 (Ont. S.C.)

Aff’d (1993), 1993 CanLII 480 (Ont. C.A.)

Roseneck v. Gowling, 2002 CarswellOnt 4396 (Ont. C.A.)).

Naidoo v. Naidoo, 2004 CarswellOnt 1475 (Ont. S.C.J.)).

Abaza v. Abaza, 2001 CarswellOnt 1283 (Ont. S.C.J.))

Helmy v. Helmy (2000), 12 R.F.L. (5th) 68, 2000 CarswellOnt 4480 (Ont. S.C.J.)).

Fenn v. Fenn (1987), 10 R.F.L. (3d) 408 (Ont.H.C.)

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com

“If My Ex Starts Living with Someone Else, Can I Stop Paying Spousal Support?“

Couple who have fallen out over a disagreement sitting on a sofa

Couple who have fallen out over a disagreement sitting on a sofa

“If My Ex Starts Living with Someone Else, Can I Stop Paying Spousal Support?“

In this modern age of serial relationships, multiple marriages and various couplings and un-couplings, I often get asked how spousal support entitlement is affected when the support recipient goes on to form a new relationship. In other words, if you are the spouse paying support to your Ex, does that obligation change if he or she remarries or starts seeing someone else?

The question is not an easy one to answer, because the outcome is very situation-dependent. It really depends on the facts, and this requires an examination of numerous elements involving not only you and your Ex, but (to a lesser extent) the contribution of his or her new partner as well.

With that said, some guidance can be found in a recent Ontario case called Strifler v. Strifler where the judge listed some of the numerous factors and principles that family courts should consider in determining the significance of a new relationship on a former spouse’s support entitlement.

First of all, the court made the important point that there is no automatic cut-off: If you are paying support to your Ex, he or she will not become disentitled simply because they have a new relationship on the go. Instead, whether or not you can reduce or eliminate your spousal support obligation will depend on several factors, including:

• the duration and stability of your Ex’s new relationship

• the value to your Ex of any benefit that he or she receives by reason of that new relationship

• the existence of any legal obligation on the part of your Ex’s new partner to provide support

• the economic circumstances of your Ex’s new partner (and this comparison will sometimes be made in relation to your own economic situation, as the paying spouse)

From a practical perspective, your Ex may be called upon justify continued spousal support from you, despite his or her cohabiting with or remarrying someone else. In this regard the courts do tend to acknowledge the reality that the longer your Ex has been in the new relationship, the greater the obligation on his or her partner to provide financial support to your Ex as well.

Finally, it’s important to consider the purpose of support payments in the first place. For example, if the ordered support is designed to be compensatory – meaning that it is aimed at compensating your Ex for the historically-based disadvantage suffered as a result of your marriage and its breakdown – then his or her marriage to or cohabitation with someone else does not affect that entitlement one way or the other. Again, it really depends on the facts.

For the full text of the decision, see:

Strifler v. Strifler, 2014 ONCJ 69, 2014 CarswellOnt 1559 (Ont. S.C.)

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com.

How Base Child Support is Calculated – video


 

Wednesday’s Video Clip: How Base Child Support is Calculated

In this video we discuss how the Child Support Table in the Guidelines sets out the amounts of support to be paid, depending on the “gross income” of the paying parent and the number of children that the support order covers. Gross income means before taxes and most other deductions. The amounts to be paid are based on the average amounts of money that parents at various income levels spend to raise a child.

In simple cases, the table alone will determine how much money will be paid. In more complicated cases, the table is used as the starting point. There is a different table for each province and territory.

If both parents live in Ontario, the Ontario table applies. Also, if the paying parent lives outside of Canada and the parent with custody lives in Ontario, the Ontario table applies. But if the paying parent lives in another province or territory, the table for that province or territory is the one that applies.

 

The table sets out the amount of support that must be paid at different income levels from $8,000 to $150,000, depending on the number of children. A base amount is given for every $1,000 increase in income, along with a way to calculate amounts in between.

There is also a Simplified Table where you can look up the paying parent’s income to the nearest $100, without having to do any calculations.

Sometimes, a judge does not accept a parent’s statement of income. Instead the judge uses an amount of income that is reasonable based on things such as the parent’s work history, past income, and education. The judge will then apply the table to that income.

A judge might do this if the parent:

• fails to provide the required income information

• is deliberately unemployed or under employed, or

• is self-employed or working “under the table”, and there is reason to believe they do not report all of their income

Before the Guidelines came into effect, judges had more flexibility in deciding the amount of support. Now, in simple cases, judges must order the amount shown in the table. Judges can order different amounts, but only in special cases. And they must use the table amount as a guide.

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com.

Can A Misbehaving Spouse Get Occupation Rent? Maybe.

Right Facing Red For Rent Real Estate Sign in Front of Beautiful House.

Right Facing Red For Rent Real Estate Sign in Front of Beautiful House.

Can A Misbehaving Spouse Get Occupation Rent? Maybe.

As we wrote in an article back a few years ago in Ontario the concept of “occupation rent” arises in family law in situations where spouses who co-own a matrimonial home have decided to separate, and one of them physically moves out.

When it comes time to untangle their financial affairs leading up to or part of a divorce, the remaining (i.e. still-occupying) spouse may at the court’s discretion be obliged by law to pay and amount for “rent” to the other spouse starting on the separation date, and based on fair market value rent. This is by no means an automatic right in every case (and indeed, it is considered by courts to be an “exceptional remedy”). However, once established this rent obligation can theoretically continue as long as the occupying spouse remains living on the premises, pending sale of the property and a splitting of proceeds as part of the equalization.

In deciding whether to pay occupation rent, the court must take numerous established factors into account. One of them (from among more than a half-dozen) is the conduct of the non-occupying spouse.

This has been the focal point of several recent cases:

• In the recent decision of  Malik v. Malik, the husband claimed occupation rent from the wife even though he had acted very badly: He had taken the equity out of the family home, had absconded the jurisdiction, and had made no voluntary child support payments at all, even though he could financially afford to. In disallowing his claim, the court said: “A non-occupying spouse ought never receive occupational rent for a period in which he or she has deliberately avoided the payment of child support.”

• Likewise, in Wimalaratnam v. Wimalaratnam, the husband’s claim for occupational rent was even more tenuous: not only did he fail to meet his support obligations to his wife and children, and stopped paying his share of the mortgage and other home expenses, but he was actually excluded from the home as a result of his own criminal conduct. He had been forcibly removed from the home after being charged with several criminal offences, and was later found guilty of one of them. This being the case, the husband was the author of his own misfortune in terms of being excluded from the home; in the circumstances it was not appropriate to award him occupation rent.

• On the other hand, in a case called Stetco v. Stetco, the judge found it was fair to grant occupation rent of $1,000 per month to the husband, even though he had been abusive in the 32-year marriage to the wife. For example, he had used violence and threats of violence to force her to sign a joint line of credit a year before the marriage ending, which he then ran up with debt. He had no clear or credible explanation for where he spent the money.

After separation the wife continued to live modestly, while the husband bought a car, a new home, regularly entertained, and contributed to his RRSPs. Still – and even though the husband’s conduct “shocked the conscience of the court” – it saw fit to award him 21 months’ occupation rent after taking into account various factors, including the equalization payment and the manner in which the parties’ assets would be split. A later appeal court affirmed that ruling.

Trying to predict whether occupation rent will be awarded can be a slippery exercise; as with so many legal determinations, the outcome will always depend on the specific facts.

For the full text of the decisions, see:

Malik v. Malik, 2015 ONSC 2218

Wimalaratnam v. Wimalaratnam, 2010 ONSC 4491

Stetco v. Stetco, 2014 ONCA 370, 2014 CarswellOnt 5919 (Ont. C.A.)

Affirming Stetco v. Stetco, 2013 CarswellOnt 7087, 2013 ONSC 3103 (Ont. S.C.J.)

 

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com.

Now Hiring: Family Law Associate Lawyer

hiring

Now Hiring: Family Law Associate Lawyer

Russell Alexander Collaborative Family Lawyers work exclusively
on divorce law and family related matters, including custody, spousal
support, child support and separation.

Our lawyers, law clerks and staff members employ a team-oriented approach to serving our clients.

We are seeking an Associate Lawyer to join our team. A minimum of
two years post-call experience in family law is required. Compensation
will include a salary plus incentive based compensation.

Contract position also available.

We promote a work life balance by focusing on our families and giving
back to our communities.

Apply now.

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com.

 

10 Ways to Get Information About Family Law – video


 

Wednesday’s Video Clip: 10 Ways to Get Information About Family Law

In this video we discuss how there are many professional people, organizations and other sources that can help you or provide information about family law issues:

1. An information centre specializing in family justice

2. A parent education course for separating parents

3. Duty counsel at a legal aid office

4. A community legal clinic

5. A university law school with a student-run legal information service

6. A law society or bar association referral service for a lawyer

7. A divorce support or self-help group

8. Relevant library books and videos

9. The yellow pages, white pages or blue pages in your telephone book have listings for many of these resources, and

10. A librarian at your public library may also be able to help you.

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com.

Financial Disclosure to the Ex: Do I Have to Report All Self-Employment Income?

under table

Financial Disclosure to the Ex: Do I Have to Report All Self-Employment Income?

When your employment income comes from an employer in the traditional way – and when those amounts are recorded and provided by the employer for Income Tax purposes – there is little room for you as an employee to “fudge the numbers.”

But human nature being what it is, if you are self-employed you may feel some temptation, particularly when those income amounts are being used to calculate the support to be (begrudgingly) paid to an Ex in a separation or divorce proceeding. This is because when you run your own business, it is far easier to “forget” to include income amounts or do some “creative bookkeeping”, and generally low-ball your income when providing financial disclosure.

But tempting as it may be, my (free) professional advice is this: Don’t do it.
For one thing, there is a well-established general legal obligation on all parties to a family law proceeding to provide full, frank disclosure of their financial information; otherwise, the court is entitled to draw assumptions and make inferences that can (and probably will) work against you. This applies equally to those who are self-employed, as has been emphasized by the court in a case called Meade v. Meade:

It is inherent in the circumstances of those who are self-employed or have irregular income and expenses, that they have a positive obligation to put forward not only adequate but comprehensive records of income and expenses. That does not mean audited statements. But it does mean a package from which the recipient spouse can draw conclusions and the amount of child support can be established. Where disclosure is inadequate and inferences are to be drawn, they should be favourable to the spouse who is confronted with the challenge of making sense out of financial disclosure and against the spouse whose records are so inadequate or whose response to the obligation to produce is so unhelpful that cumbersome calculations and intensive or costly investigations or examinations are necessary.

The precise application of these principles, and the question of whether the self-employed spouse has fulfilled his or her obligations, will depend on the circumstances. In Squirrell v. Squirrell, for example, the court found it insufficient for the husband to merely refer the court to his and his company’s accountant, and expect the accountant to allocate income for the court’s calculations. The court said it “hardly sounds plausible and certainly is not sufficient to discharge the onus” on the husband to provide proof of the accuracy of his reported net income and expenses.

If you are self-employed and need to provide income figures for support-calculation purposes, the bottom line is this:

• You have the onus to clearly demonstrate the basis of your net income.

• This includes an inherent obligation to put forward adequate and comprehensive records of your income and expenses.

• The records must form a “package” from which your former spouse can draw conclusions, and from which the amount of child or spousal support you owe can be established.

• You must also prove that your claimed deductions from gross income should be taken into account in calculating your income for support purposes.

And most importantly: If a court finds that your disclosure is inadequate or that you are not being forthright, it is entitled to make assumptions and draw inferences that may actually work against you in setting the eventual support amounts.

For some illustrative cases, see:

Meade v. Meade, 2002 CanLII 2806 (S.C.J.)

Whelan v. O’Connor, 2006 CanLII 13554 (ON SC), [2006] O.J. No. 1660 (Ont. Fam. Ct.)

Carty-Pusey v. Pusey, 2015 ONCJ 382 (CanLII)

Wilson v. Wilson, 2011 ONCJ 103 (CanLII)

Squirrell v. Squirrell, 2012 ONCJ 284 (CanLII)

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com.

Ashley Madison: Hackers Release More Data

amm

Ashley Madison: Hackers Release More Data

As many of you will know, in mid-July of this year the infidelity website AshleyMadison.com, which enables married people to find partners with whom to conduct secret affairs, was the target of hackers who released certain user information to the public.
Earlier this week, the culprits struck again, releasing a second larger “dump” of data that reveals not only information on the users’ identity, but other sensitive information as well.

The group taking credit is known as “Impact Team”; it had initially targeted Ashley Madison’s Toronto-based parent company, Avid Life Media, claiming that it had ripped off customers by charging them a $19 fee to delete their data permanently, but then not actually deleting it. Alleging that the false “full delete” service had netted the company $1.7 million in 2014, Impact Team then threatened to release more data if the entire site was not disabled permanently.

The most recent data exposure releases information on approximately 32 million Ashley Madison users – the vast majority of whom are male – and includes their names, usernames, addresses, phone numbers, and dates of birth. It also includes users’ own descriptions of themselves in profiles they would have set up during registration (e.g. “Let’s start as friends….”) as well as sensitive credit card information, login details and passwords.
Apparently, the latest release also reveals certain emails linked to the website’s founder and chief executive of the parent company, Noel Biderman.

Needless to say, from a public-interest standpoint, the data breach and its fallout has been particularly “sexy” fodder for discussion (pun intended); it has raised sort of legal issues and water-cooler chat relating data integrity, privacy, and criminality, not to mention the more obvious social issues relating to infidelity, ethics and morality.

But even leaving aside the more salacious aspects of the divulged information, at the very least it shows the widespread prevalence of actual or potential cheaters, and hints at the question of whether society’s appetite and tolerance for infidelity has changed. Indeed, using the latest release of Ashley Madison user data some socially-curious minds have even “run the numbers” to generate a worldwide map that illustrates the distribution of assumed cheaters across the globe.

Interesting stuff.

What are your thoughts?

At Russell Alexander, Family Lawyers our focus is exclusively family law, offering pre-separation legal advice and assisting clients with family related issues including: custody and access, separation agreements, child and spousal support, division of family property, paternity disputes, and enforcement of court orders. For more information, visit us at www.RussellAlexander.com

To learn more, we have written several blogs on adultery and affairs, including:

Adultery and Affairs

Man Gives Woman $130K: Was it a Post-Infidelity Symbol of Commitment? Or Was He Buying an Interest in Her Home?

In a Failed Romance, Can You Sue for Negligence?

Can You Sue Your Ex’s Affair Partner for Damages?

Was Wife the “Target of a Campaign of Terror” at the Hands of Husband’s Mistress?

Gambling, Drinking and Affairs – Should Spouses Have to Account for their Misdeeds?

Top Five Points About Adultery That You Probably Didn’t Know