I found this on a blog I read:
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/do...&resultIndex=1
Its an interesting case. Two kids in university. One in an MA program in the states. Questions were basically around whether payor is responsible for cs when both children are away and whether he pays for second degree.
The judge considered an agreement made in minutes of settlement for cs. It was determined that based on that, CS at 60% table was payable for kid #2 away at school (plus proportionate share of S7). For MA program, because they had been able to cover entire BA costs via RESP and because applicant could prove the MA program would give kid #1 a better shot at her dream job and that she was rejected from an equivalent Canadian program, S7 costs were applicable.
Also had to pay part of the money in US funds. Thats a burn.
Didnt really specify (from my reading) what the kids' share of school was though.
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/do...&resultIndex=1
Its an interesting case. Two kids in university. One in an MA program in the states. Questions were basically around whether payor is responsible for cs when both children are away and whether he pays for second degree.
The judge considered an agreement made in minutes of settlement for cs. It was determined that based on that, CS at 60% table was payable for kid #2 away at school (plus proportionate share of S7). For MA program, because they had been able to cover entire BA costs via RESP and because applicant could prove the MA program would give kid #1 a better shot at her dream job and that she was rejected from an equivalent Canadian program, S7 costs were applicable.
Also had to pay part of the money in US funds. Thats a burn.
Didnt really specify (from my reading) what the kids' share of school was though.