Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2017, 05:59 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,048
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alberich View Post
The father in law is not a party to the litigation. I have never claimed he was. However, since he resides with one of the parties, (the applicant). Since there is a claim for spousal support, the applicant shall disclose the income of all income earner who reside with the party vlaiming support. This comes from a lawyer. Now, all of you who disagree with this, please offer more than just opinions. We are looking for facts, cases...support. whether it be pro or con...just support your statements.


You do know that the rebuttal for this will be that she can't afford to move out without SS and living with her father is a temporary solution correct?

I would be careful with taking this stance because if you feel she needs to include her father if/when she moves out, that could cause her to seek more SS, if/when you get a new partner (if you don't already) that could cause her to seek more SS since you had another person in your house.

Roommates do not have to disclose income, unless undue hardship is claimed. Please provide your cases and laws that state a father/party that is not part of the case has to provide income for support purposes. If she was living with a new partner then I suppose you could argue but surely you don't expect her father to support her forever?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2017, 05:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,838
stripes is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alberich View Post
The father in law is not a party to the litigation. I have never claimed he was. However, since he resides with one of the parties, (the applicant). Since there is a claim for spousal support, the applicant shall disclose the income of all income earner who reside with the party vlaiming support. This comes from a lawyer. Now, all of you who disagree with this, please offer more than just opinions. We are looking for facts, cases...support. whether it be pro or con...just support your statements.
I think your lawyer is wrong. Here is what the federal government has to say about spousal support:

About spousal support

There's no mention of other people's income. I think you or your lawyer are confusing the concept of undue hardship (when you're unable to pay your support obligations because it would cause serious financial stress, in which case the incomes of everyone in the household of the party claiming undue hardship are taken into consideration) with spousal support.

Or consider the counterfactual situation, in which your father in law's income was taken into consideration when calculating spousal support. When he loses his job or retires, would you agree that your spousal support payments should go up? No, because your father in law was not your spouse, and your obligation to support pertains to your spouse, not to her relatives, roommates, friends, etc.

SS is an agreement between two parties. Your ex has to show why she thinks she is entitled to SS. Her father is not one of the parties, so he's irrelevant.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2017, 11:53 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,567
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alberich View Post
In Schwabe v. Schwabe, 2008 CanLII 64392, Par 11, the Judge stated:

[11] Finally, the wife submits that the husband has failed to complete his financial statement in that he has failed to complete Part 6 of his financial statement relating to “Other Income Earners in the Home”. The respondent takes the position that the income of his new spouse is not relevant. While I can understand both he and his new spouse’s view on this form, there is no doubt that the law requires the form to be completed and the respondent is ordered to do so within the next 30 days.
Also, a tip to you alberich... You need to hit the button on the top of the page called "headnotes" and you will see this 2012 case that is related to this one. Note, the trial happened in 2010 and this was quoted from it:

Quote:
[1] On May 10, 2010, following a trial Justice Daley made the following order, in part:

1. The respondent shall pay to the applicant continuing spousal support at the rate of $1,000.00 per month for two more years ending May 1, 2012.

Source: Schwabe v. Schwabe, 2012 ONSC 4573 (CanLII), par. 1, http://canlii.ca/t/fs9wg#par11
Suffice to say, the party didn't get out of paying SS and nor did the income of the other party even come into the calculation.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2017, 11:57 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,567
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alberich View Post
In Matthews v. Matthews, 2001 CanLII 28118, the husband challenged his obligation to complete Part 4 of his Financial Statement (Form 13), in which be would be required to disclose the income of other income earners in his home. The judge stated “the income of anyone sharing the…party’s household becomes relevant in order to complete the standards of living test provided for in s. 10(4).”
Did you even check to see what s.10(4) and the "standards of living test" comes from? It comes from the FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES for the determination of undue hardship.

You need to drop the nonsense and get a new lawyer.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can a friend represent me if I have to self represent anxious Divorce & Family Law 3 10-14-2013 03:00 PM
what is better; changing legal aid lawyer or the lawyer choosing not to represent marivana Divorce & Family Law 3 08-30-2013 09:39 AM
Self Represent in Superior Court - Scary !?? Roni Divorce & Family Law 8 08-30-2013 12:49 AM
Who can represent? Berner_Faith Divorce & Family Law 18 09-30-2011 10:51 PM
Are Judges more biased towards people who self represent? Nadia Divorce & Family Law 36 01-20-2011 09:25 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:15 AM.