View Single Post
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2006, 01:34 PM
logicalvelocity logicalvelocity is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,943
logicalvelocity has a spectacular aura aboutlogicalvelocity has a spectacular aura aboutlogicalvelocity has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via Yahoo to logicalvelocity
Default

Mikesgal,

I would have to say that first family obligation is first priority, then 2nd family child support obligation and lastly the obligation to support spouse.

Now you could bring these points up but most likely they would be given very little consideration as the support obligation issue is the first family.

I would place more emphasis on naming the grandparents as a third party as in fact the child is living with them.

Upon saying that; the mother of this child has an obligation to provide support ot this same child.

To get the current support varied, the onus is on the party seeking the variance to prove the material change; this is relatively easy to do being that the child lives with the grandparents. In essence, the grandparents are now acting as the child parents. Since the child still requires support, it is logic to reason that the grandparents should receive the support as it appears they are acting as custodians for the child. Under the law, both parents are obligated to provide support for their child.

Family Law Act R.S.O. 1990, c.F.3

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/S...f03_e.htm#BK31

Definitions

1. (1) In this Act,

child” includes a person whom a parent has demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child of his or her family, except under an arrangement where the child is placed for valuable consideration in a foster home by a person having lawful custody; (“enfant”)

“parent” includes a person who has demonstrated a settled intention to treat a child as a child of his or her family, except under an arrangement where the child is placed for valuable consideration in a foster home by a person having lawful custody;

PART III
SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS



Definitions

29. In this Part,

“dependant” means a person to whom another has an obligation to provide support under this Part; (“personne à charge”)

Obligation of parent to support child

31. (1) Every parent has an obligation to provide support for his or her unmarried child who is a minor or is enrolled in a full time program of education, to the extent that the parent is capable of doing so. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 31 (1); 1997, c. 20, s. 2.

Idem

(2) The obligation under subsection (1) does not extend to a child who is sixteen years of age or older and has withdrawn from parental control. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 31 (2).

This is where Judicial descretion of the court comes in to play; To me the child is under the control of the grandparents afterall, the grandparent spoke to the school, this suggests that they were acting as a parent.

1) Are the grandparents acting as parents, If so, then the child has not withdrawn and is entitled to support from both parents. It appears they are.

2) If is is determined that the child has withdrawn from parential control that being (the mother) regardless if he is now attending school, then there will be no support obligation.

I can't see option 2 as an option as child support is paramont and is the child's right to same. This child is somewhat older, but still a child.

I would mention the other support obligations(2nd family and spousal support), but keep it low key. Place emphasis on having the grand parents named as a party and emphasis on the mother paying child support in addition to your own contribution. Who knows a Judge may look at each parties income and split the tabled amount between the parent's to be paid to the grandparent's as long as the child is enrolled in school.

Order for support

Section 33(1)

33. (1) A court may, on application, order a person to provide support for his or her dependants and determine the amount of support. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 33 (1).

Applicants

(2) An application for an order for the support of a dependant may be made by the dependant or the dependant’s parent. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 33 (2).


Adding party

(5) In an application the court may, on a respondent’s motion, add as a party another person who may have an obligation to provide support to the same dependant.
R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 33 (5).

Idem

(6) In an action in the Ontario Court (General Division), the defendant may add as a third party another person who may have an obligation to provide support to the same dependant. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 33 (6).


Purposes of order for support of child

(7) An order for the support of a child should,

(a) recognize that each parent has an obligation to provide support for the child;


(b) apportion the obligation according to the child support guidelines. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 33 (7); 1997, c. 20, s. 3 (1).

LV

Last edited by logicalvelocity; 05-09-2006 at 01:38 PM.