Here is my issue in a nutshell. I was in a relationship which ended 3 years ago from which I am the daddy of a beautiful 4 year old girl. The relationship lasted for a total of 2 years. Although contested, we lived in separate principle residence between April of 2003 and July of 2004 save for 4 months in the winter of 2003 that I lived at her place through the week and then at my own house on weekends. Emma was born June 12, 2004 and we moved in together sharing one principle residence July 1, 2004. We lived together until May 29, 2005 when due to irreconcilable differences we went our separate ways. So the actual cohabitation period was a little less than a year by my calculation, but if you take into account 4 months that I lived with her the previous winter, it could be looked at as 1.5 years together cohabitating. At the time of our breakup, she held the same position of employment which she had held prior to our relationship. She was making approximately $28,000 and I was making $33,000 at the time. When we broke up, I continued to pay the mortgage on the house which we owned collectively and promised that upon the sale of my own home, I would pay her $10,800 in a lump sum payment to "walk away." That $10,800 was to buy out her interest in the house which we collectively owned and that if sold at the time would have resulted in an $8000 loss as well as to get her on her feet with new accommodations. As of November 2005, she received the promised $10,800 cheque.
If I am correct, with such a small differential in pay, I would not have been required to pay spousal support as her income would have been very much equalized taking into account the $300 monthly child support payments, increased income tax returns and child tax benefits we received. Is this correct?
Secondly, she has now decided that 3 years later, now that my income has more than doubled, that she wants a piece of the pie and is after me for spousal support. Here is where this case gets interesting. 1 year and 3 months after our breakup, she left her $28,000 job and returned to school. Although she was never a dependent spouse while we were together she is now claiming (3 years later) to be a dependent spouse in need of support. Is there any chance that the courts will buy this? Or will they fault her for leaving her paid position?
If I am correct, with such a small differential in pay, I would not have been required to pay spousal support as her income would have been very much equalized taking into account the $300 monthly child support payments, increased income tax returns and child tax benefits we received. Is this correct?
Secondly, she has now decided that 3 years later, now that my income has more than doubled, that she wants a piece of the pie and is after me for spousal support. Here is where this case gets interesting. 1 year and 3 months after our breakup, she left her $28,000 job and returned to school. Although she was never a dependent spouse while we were together she is now claiming (3 years later) to be a dependent spouse in need of support. Is there any chance that the courts will buy this? Or will they fault her for leaving her paid position?
Comment