View Single Post
  #3  
Old 11-03-2011, 04:36 PM
BeenThereTwice BeenThereTwice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 95
BeenThereTwice is on a distinguished road
Default Answering my own question

From PLISKEVICIUS and L’HOMME 2011 ONSC 6102

27. Under s. 34(1)(i) of the Ontario Family Law Act (“FLA”), the court has jurisdiction to order a spouse who has an existing life insurance policy to irrevocably designate a child the beneficiary: R.S.O. 1990, c. F. 3.
28. However, the issue of whether a court has jurisdiction to order a person to obtain a new life insurance policy is somewhat more complex. Section 34(1)(k) of the FLA, supra gives the court jurisdiction to make an order requiring the security of payment under the order by a charge or property or otherwise. Section 12 of the provincial Child Support Guidelines, O. Reg. 391/97 provides that the court may require in the order for child support that the amount payable under the order be paid or secured, or paid and secured, in the manner specified in the order. Section 15.1(4) of the Divorce Act, supra enables the court to order the payment of child support upon such terms, conditions or restrictions as the court thinks fit and just. Section 12 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines is identical to the same section of the provincial Guidelines noted above (S.O.R. 97-175).
29. In Laczko v Laczko, the Superior Court of Justice held that subsection 34(1)(k) of the FLA is sufficiently broad in scope as to give the court jurisdiction to order the purchase of a life insurance policy for the purpose of securing child support payments: 176 D.L.R. (4th) 507, 1999 CarswellOnt 2106