No announcement yet.

amendment to separation agreement

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • amendment to separation agreement

    Question for you all :

    Separation agreement was signed 8 years ago and a new amendment signed and court ordered 1.5 years ago changed a few things. The amendment stated that all other parts of the original agreement remain and are agreed to.

    One party has threated to open up the separation agreement signed now 8 years ago and seek financial arears 8 years back. Both parties waived financial disclosure signing forms from their lawyers since the finances were so simple- basis that reason.

    Then the amendment was signed 1.5 years ago again agreeing to all remaining terms of the agreement. My friends thought this means there is agreement on all items, including support and that was part of the negotiation of the terms of the amendment.

    Can the other party go back 8 years? Even 3 years as I've read is often the case?

  • #2
    Financial arrears for what?

    Were they both fully transparent on income for support? Did they both fully disclose assets? Did they both get legal advice?

    If yes to all then they will not get far with that argument.


    • #3
      Yes to all of those questions.

      Incomes have increased disproportionally and financial discourse was done again for several years leading into the amendment. My friend said he thought in agreeing to those items he was also agreeing to no financial changes ---part of bargaining for other non- financial matters. And therefore included the language in the statement that all other terms are agreed to.

      Could the other person request to go back and seek money from prior to the amendment? Lets say 3-4 years back and seek the amounts from one of those calculators?

      I realize this doesn't make sense but wondering how someone could file to open up the separation agreement... or how they could seek money prior to the amendment?


      • #4
        Is it spousal support? I donít think they can do that. Itís not the payors fault someone canít get their shit together.


        • #5
          When you amend the agreement its only the items removed or changed that are 'updated' and anything not changed from the original agreement would then still be in effect as far as I know. (correct me if wrong.. I am also amending my agreement). As far as the going back only 3 years question I am interested in knowing the answer as my partners ex is trying to go back farther as well.


          • #6
            From what I understand - 3 years is normal in Ontario? Outside of that has other circumstances like proven fraud or refusing to disclose could make it longer?


            • #7
              Notice rockscan keeps asking if it is child support or spousal support.

              A general rule of thumb is that if you screw up spousal support due to your own negligence, the courts are unlikely to save you. Especially if you had a lawyer during the time you screwed up, and where the paying spouse fully disclosed all financial details.

              Child support though is the right of the child, and the child cannot be held responsible for parent screw ups. Correct child support is always owed to the child, even if the receiving parent was not on the ball.

              That said, the courts also recognize that some amount of certainty is required. The paying parent has the right to arrange their financial affairs assuming that the CS amount is correct.

              How does this all play out in practice?

              A) If the paying parent was BAD (eg. did not disclose income increases despite requests from recipient parent) then the courts are willing to go very very far back to rectify the injustice.

              B) If the paying parent was GOOD (disclosed income increases) but the recipient parent was BAD (didn't actually bother asking for an increase in CS) then the courts generally will go back to the time that the recipient parent first asked for the CS increase. They might go back even further than that, but to a maximum of about three years.

              C) Paying parent can also be SORTA BAD (income went up but did not disclose) and recipient parent can be also SORTA BAD (did not ask for income disclosure). That is the one that is most commonly capped at 3 years.


              • #8
                Its for both spousal and child support. The motion just filed tries to unlock the separation agreement from 2014 due to both parties waving full disclosure forms as the assets/bank accounts were very simple and everyone new the financial situation a few months from separating. They both signed forms agreeing to it and their counsel did as well. Nothing for 7 plus years and now the other party is stating non-disclosure with no specific evidence other than waiving 7 years ago. Full disclosure was provided leading into an amendment in 2019 with no mention of this at all. Now this filing is trying to 'unlock' both agreements since my friend wants to end spousal. At the end of the day - there we no hidden assets or accounts (not a wealthy couple). This is a crap argument right?


                • #9
                  Agreements are not unlocked, they are either valid or they are not. Assuming there was full disclosure in 2019, that sounds like a valid agreement.


                  Our Divorce Forums
                  Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.