M.A.G. v. J.L.A., 2018 BCPC 206

Citation: M.A.G. v. J.L.A. 2018 BCPC 206 Date: 20180305 File No: 16640 Registry: Abbotsford IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE MATTER OF THE FAMILY LAW ACT , S.B.C. 2011 c. 25 BETWEEN: M.A.G. APPLICANT AND: J.L.A. RESPONDENT REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE J. I. SOLOMON Counsel for the Applicant: Ryan Dueckman Appearing on their own behalf: J.L.A., The Respondent Place of Hearing: Abbotsford , B.C. Dates of Hearing: Feb 1, 3, July 4, Sept 28, Oct 6, Nov 30, 2017, Jan 31, Feb 22, 2018 Date of Judgment: March 5, 2018

A Corrigendum was released by the Court on July 31, 2018. The corrections have been made to the text and the Corrigendum is appended to this document. [ 1 ] The parties were in a common-law relationship from November 2007 to July 2015. M.A.G. had three children from a previous relationship who were living with her full time: D.G. born [omitted for publication]; J.G. born [omitted for publication]; and P.G. born [omitted for publication]. The parties have one child together, A.

A., born [omitted for publication]. [ 2 ] M.A.G. applies for sole guardianship of A.A.; child support for all four children; spousal support; all parental responsibilities; and a protection order. [ 3 ] J.L.A. applies for guardianship of A.A., equal parenting time and equal parental responsibilities. [ 4 ] The hearing began February 1, 2017 and continued on February 3, 2017, July 4, 2017, September 28, 2017, October 6, 2017, November 30, 2017, January 31, 2018, and February 22, 2018. [ 5 ] On behalf of M.A.G. I heard from her, her mother B.T., and S.C., a registered clinical counsellor. On behalf of J.L.A.

I heard from him alone. He is self-represented and although this likely contributed to the length of this hearing I commend him for behaving in a respectful and prepared manner at all times. Evidence of M.A.G. [ 6 ] She was born on [omitted for publication]. She was in a relationship with J.L.A. from 2007 to July 13, 2015. They have one daughter together A.A. born [omitted for publication]. She has three children from a previous relationship ages 20, 18 and 14. Her ex- spouse P.G. has generally paid child support pursuant to court order.

There was a time of no support payments but she did not seek enforcement. [ 7 ] During her relationship with J.L.A. there was a slow progression of concerning behaviour by him. For example, he punched his fist through a window, punched their dog in the ribs, smashed holes in walls, kicked doors, screwed the laundry door shut since it was not being closed properly to prevent the dog from getting into the kitty litter, smashed lights, punched the fridge, and smashed dishes.

Some of the property damage was photographed and filed as Exhibit 6 on this hearing. [ 8 ] There were periods of time that J.L.A. ignored the family and separated his food from others. At one point he excessively bathed A.A. telling her she was dirty. [ 9 ] There was an incident where J.L.A. kicked a door in, chased her upstairs screaming at her, but her son J.G. intervened. J.L.A. yelled at J.G. and then backed down.

J.L.A. was upset about the direction of the shower nozzle after use by other family members so he threatened to cut the nozzle off with bolt cutters. [ 10 ] J.L.A. often smashed light switches when lights were not turned off but he would later repair them. The bathroom light switch was broken at least a dozen times by him. He was rough with her son J.G. and once pinned him against the wall when they were passing each other on the stairs. [ 11 ] J.G. ran away from the house between March 30 and May 24, 2015. He left because of J.L.A.

He said he couldn’t take it anymore. [ 12 ] They often argued about money and she was totally dependent on him. On June 23, 2015 they argued over payment of bills and he bumped his chest up against her. This caused her to fly against the counter. He leaned over her gritting his teeth and said she will pay the bill they were arguing over. He put his hand in a fist and threatened to “deck” her. He stopped short of punching her and left. He often left the house after these episodes and returned after calming down. [ 13 ] On June 23, 2015 she became concerned that J.L.A. would harm J.G. so she called 911.

J.G. escaped through a window and went to a neighbour who was an off-duty Abbotsford police officer. [ 14 ] Her police complaint led to criminal charges of assault and uttering threats against J.L.A. Protective bail conditions were imposed on him. [ 15 ] J.L.A. owned two properties on separation, the family residence and a rental property, which were dealt with as family assets in Supreme Court divorce proceedings. Her name was not put on title to the family residence as she was in bankruptcy at the time.

The family residence was purchased with J.L.A.’s resources alone, and the other he inherited or was gifted to by a family member. Both properties had mortgages for which J.L.A. was solely responsible. She obtained conduct of sale for the properties. [ 16 ] Prior to sale M.A.G. believed that J.L.A. was living in the rental property with all the utilities disconnected. She attended to see its condition and the saw a person believed to be J.L.A. leaving with a backpack.

Photos of the house are found in Exhibit 6 and disclose bird feces, dirty dishes, cups, empty alcohol bottles, and rotten food in the fridge. [ 17 ] J.L.A. did not respond to the Supreme Court action and the court ordered an equal division of family assets. Both properties were sold and approximately $320,000 net was realized. His 50% share was ordered to be paid into the Family Maintenance Enforcement Program (FMEP) to secure payment of support orders. Interim child and spousal support payments are being paid from that fund of money. Both properties had been foreclosed on.

M.A.G. received her share of $160,000. [ 18 ] A family court order from July 24, 2015 gave J.L.A. telephone contact and supervised parenting time with A.A. M.A.G. had all other parenting time and all parental responsibilities. For the telephone access M.A.G. called J.L.A. on his cell phone. M.A.G.’s phone records, as disclosed in Exhibit 6, show consistent calls from her to J.L.A. at or near 7 pm so he could exercise telephone contact. On

some occasions the child did not want to talk to J.L.A. He would become upset when she tried to end conversations. Calls were on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. [ 19 ] On January 27, 2016 M.A.G. was not available to facilitate telephone access. Having not received his call at 7 pm, J.L.A. called M.A.G.’s cell phone seven times between 7:04 and 7:25 pm. and texted her. M.A.G. became concerned about these attempted calls and contacted the Crown Counsel office to inquire about the terms of the recognizance of bail that J.L.A. was bound by. This led to J.L.A.’s arrest and charge for a breach of recognizance.

However, his recognizance of bail had allowed contact with her for the purpose of “arranging, facilitating, or exercising access” to the child in accordance with a family court order. On February 11, 2016 a new recognizance of bail limited contact through legal counsel only. A stay of proceedings on all charges was entered on September 9, 2016. [ 20 ] On January 29, 2016 J.L.A. cancelled all visits with the supervising agency Ann Davis Transition Society and he didn’t take calls from M.A.G. after that date. A.A. was distressed that J.L.A. did not want to talk to her.

She asked if she had done something wrong. [ 21 ] On February 18, 2016 counsel for M.A.G. emailed J.L.A. confirming that he has not been answering calls for his telephone access and advising that if he wished to resume calls to respond to this email. The email ends with: “Contacting M.A.G. directly regarding the calls will be considered a breach of your conditions.” [ 22 ] There is a child support order from September 2015 which is based on income of $75,000 per year. J.L.A. is to pay $700 per month effective October 1, 2015. [ 23 ] A.A. has suffered from extreme anxiety.

She missed 11 ½ days of school in the fall of 2015 and didn’t want to leave her mother’s side. She finished grade 2 with home-schooling. She returned to public school for Grade 3 in September 2016. [ 24 ] A

section 211 FLA views of the child report was ordered and an interview was conducted on March 10, 2016. A.A. became distressed in the interview, broke down emotionally, crawled into her mother’s lap and sobbed. She did not want to talk about her parent’s separation or her father. [ 25 ] At pages 125 to 154 of Exhibit 6 M.A.G.’s typed notes / diary are set out. The dates range from September 10, 2015 to July 30, 2016. It outlines in detail A.A.’s activities and emotional state.

J.L.A. agreed that these notes can be admitted into evidence in the place of oral evidence from M.A.G. regarding this time period to shorten her evidence. [ 26 ] A.A. was seven and eight years old during this period of time. The notes disclose an emotional child in need of lots of reassurance. A.A. often did not want to attend school and had difficulty sleeping. She expressed that she did not want to go to visits with her father. She often felt nervous before visits. One night she was crying and explained that she recalled her father bullying her mother. (See page 139 from November 1, 2015.) [ 27 ] In

summary, her evidence discloses that A.A. was traumatized by the behaviour of her father. She is afraid of him even although she loves him. A.A. recalls the verbal abuse, the holes punched in the walls, the dent to the fridge and the broken door. She also recalls her father squishing her head with the door, and doesn’t want it to happen again. She’s afraid her father might harm her mother. [ 28 ] Regarding her education she is a few credits short of a high school graduation. She has no post-secondary credits.

She was a homemaker from 1997 to 2005 and worked from 2005 to 2007 at a retail job earning nine dollars per hour. She quit that job after meeting J.L.A. and moving to the Abbotsford area. Her plan was to finish Grade 12 and take office administration courses. She hopes to obtain full-time employment. She is not working at present. She receives a child tax benefit payment of $1350 per month. Her ex- husband was required to pay $1000 per month for three children and recently $707 per month for two children. She has not sought enforcement of any missed payments.

The eldest child D.G. is now over 20 years old and no longer eligible for support. [ 29 ] As at February 22, 2018 she is attending school two days per week, three hours per day, to complete her Grade 12 education. She will graduate in June 2018. She now intends to pursue work as a Special Education Assistant and take that program of study at a local college. She could apply by the end of March 2018. She is presently looking for part time to full time work. The children are in school and she needs to consider their schedules. She expects to earn minimum wage.

She wasn’t emotionally ready to look for work until recently. She has been under a lot of stress. [ 30 ] Her sworn financial statement of June 3, 2016 indicates she was unemployed with no income since 2007. Her total expenses are $31,919. No assets are listed. She has MasterCard debt of $4600. [ 31 ] Her financial statement of January 31, 2017 indicates no employment income. However, she lists $14,400 in child support payments and $16,200 in child tax benefits. Her expenses are $59,460. Her assets include a bank account with $130,000 as a result of the division of family assets. She has MasterCard debt of $2400.

She has extraordinary expenses for A.A. of $3960 for counselling. She also lists an expense of $5700 for braces for P.G. [ 32 ] During the relationship J.L.A. always worked full-time. He is a trained carpenter and machine operator. In 2014 he earned $93,000. He would have had a similar income in 2015. Evidence of B.T. [ 33 ] She is the mother of M.A.G. and has known J.L.A. for 20 years as he was friends with her daughter’s ex-husband. She has not had contact with him since the separation. She took photographs of the rental property that are found in Exhibit 6. J.L.A. had a good work ethic. Evidence of S.C.

[ 34 ] She is a registered clinical counsellor. She began treating A.A. in October 2015 on a regular basis. She describes the child as full of fear and traumatized by her father’s behaviour. Counselling has reduced anxiety around her father who she was having supervised visits with at that time. [ 35 ] A.A. recalled that her father pushed her head between the door and wall once. The child had some guilt around needing to protect her brothers and mother. The child is afraid to go to sleep at night and says she doesn’t sleep well.

Regarding visits with her father she said she puts her heart in a metal box and throws it in the garbage until she gets home. [ 36 ] In cross-examination she testified that she had no counselling sessions with M.A.G. and never met J.L.A., so she has not heard his version of events. She was questioned in relation to parental alienation and rehearsed statements but testified she did not see any indication of that and nothing made her suspicious of it in her sessions with the child. Evidence of J.L.A. [ 37 ] He was born on [omitted for publication].

He presently lives in Abbotsford renting a room in a residence called [omitted for publication]. He plans to move to Maple Ridge to be closer to A.A. so he could exercise his parenting time. He plans to rent a two- bedroom condominium. [ 38 ] He moved out of Maple Ridge to avoid legal trouble after seeing M.A.G. in a coffee shop. [ 39 ] He is employed as a labourer in Abbotsford with [omitted for publication] since July 2017. He operates conveyor belts. This is a full-time 40 hours per week job. He has Wednesdays and Thursdays off. He has some

schedule flexibility at this employment. He usually works 6 AM to 2:30 PM. He has a gross income of $1055 every two weeks with a net of $882.51. He has no other employment. [ 40 ] At the time of separation he was working at [omitted for publication] where he had been employed for a number of years. His income from 2011 to 2015 was as follows: 2011: $96,459 2012: $85,455 2013: $76,850 2014: $93,013 2015: $79,126 [ 41 ] On January 27, 2016 M.A.G. breached the family court order by not facilitating his scheduled telephone parenting time.

When he did not receive his call from M.A.G. he called her cell phone to arrange his parenting time. This led to an unjustified arrest and charge for a breach of bail conditions, and triggered a series of decisions by him. [ 42 ] He quit his employment at the end of January 2016 and did not work the rest of the year. His first employment after leaving [omitted for publication] was in July 2017 as set out above. He earned $4000 in 2016 from [omitted for publication] but does not have the T4. He has not filed a tax return for 2016.

He lost documents and paperwork due to periods of homelessness after January 2016. [ 43 ] He quit his job at [omitted for publication] due to stress and high blood pressure. He believed that night shift work at [omitted for publication] was contributing to his mental decline. He did not inquire as to any disability plan that he might have been entitled to through his employment. [ 44 ] At the same time that he left his job at [omitted for publication] he stopped his supervised parenting time and stopped receiving the child’s telephone calls.

He did not want to be vulnerable to any further false alleged breaches that could result in his arrest and jail. He decided to wait for the court hearing to pursue equal and unsupervised parenting time. He has requested the resumption of his parenting time since the start of this hearing in February 2017 but M.A.G. has been opposed. [ 45 ] He adamantly denies committing any criminal offences in relation to M.A.G. and all charges against him were stayed in February 2017. [ 46 ] He believes that the allegations of assault and threatening were manufactured to separate him from the household and his income.

He believes that M.A.G. perjured herself in a number of aspects during the course of her evidence. [ 47 ] He acknowledges and apologizes for the damage caused by him to the family residence. He is sorry that his family had to endure this behaviour. He says that the abuse went both ways. He was abused in several ways by M.A.G. He admits to recreational drug use prior to meeting M.A.G. but he has not used drugs for the last 10 years. He does continue to consume alcohol on a regular basis. [ 48 ] There were several arguments with M.A.G. over financial matters.

His income was insufficient to meet all their expenses and he wanted her to go to work once A.A. started full-time school but she refused. [ 49 ] They also argued over how she was parenting her three sons. He felt that she was not consistent and did not impose sufficient discipline. They agreed on a number of rules for the house and he was left to enforce them. She intentionally interfered with his parenting time with A.A. by scheduling things on his days off, having dinner before he got home from work and taking her to play dates.

They always kept separate bank accounts but he gave her access to one of his accounts to pay some bills. [ 50 ] Their dysfunctional and toxic relationship had been ongoing since 2010. He started employment at [omitted for publication] as a labourer in 2010. This offered more stable employment for him and a good chance for overtime. He is a journeyman carpenter as well

but he has not worked in that field for over eight years now. [ 51 ] By 2011 and 2012 he and M.A.G. were sleeping in separate areas of the house. The middle child J.G. was starting to act up. He started a fire at school and was suspended. [ 52 ] In 2013 he did a firearm safety course and obtained a firearm license. He grew up in Alberta and has always been around firearms. For his 16 th birthday his mother bought him a gun club membership. He had a valid FAC. In 2014 he bought a firearm and brought it home. [ 53 ] Due to their financial disagreements on three occasions he cancelled M.A.G.’s credit card.

It was to be used for emergency purposes for the children but she bought other stuff that he disagreed with. [ 54 ] By 2014 the family situation was getting worse. M.A.G. limited his time with A.A. She made him sign contracts setting out where he would take the child, when he planned to return and what the planned activity was. He didn’t agree with this requirement but he complied to keep the peace. He has never taken any of the children without permission or not returned them at scheduled times. [ 55 ] On June 23, 2015 at 5 PM he came home from work and there was mail in the bedroom.

There were two utility bills. He paid half the bills by telephone. He then took the bills to her and demanded she pay her half. An argument over these bills ensued. M.A.G. slammed the fridge door and charged at him. A.A. was in the living room at the time. She poked him in the chest three times and yelled at him. He raised his hand, pointed at her and told her to “fuck off”. She said “go ahead and hit me” but he turned around and walked away. [ 56 ] On the same day at 7 PM he went outside to barbecue and noticed an ashtray with some cigarette butts. There was a rule of no smoking around the house.

He had quit smoking when M.A.G. was pregnant. J.G. had started smoking and they had agreed that he could smoke off the property only. [ 57 ] Without his knowledge M.A.G. started to allow J.G. to smoke outside on the property. He was worried about this since J.G. was absent-minded and he had previously started a fire at his school. When he went down to talk to J.G. about this issue M.A.G. called 911. The police attended and told him to leave for 24 hours to cool off. He did what he was told by the police. [ 58 ] In July 2015 during his scheduled holiday he went for two days to Edmonton.

When he returned home on July 13, 2015 he was arrested at 7:30 AM. [ 59 ] From September 9, 2015 to January 23, 2016 he exercised supervised parenting time with A.A. through Ann Davis Transition Society . These visits went very well and the child showed no fear or anxiety around him. The Ann Davis supervised visit program reports were filed as Exhibit 8 on this hearing. They confirm that the visits were exceptionally positive and there is no indication of any untoward interactions between father and daughter or of any fear or anxiety in relation to the visits.

M.A.G. attempted to interfere with those visits and he had to return to court to confirm that Ann Davis was an acceptable supervising agency. [ 60 ] During this time he started counselling sessions with T.V. in Abbotsford. He had taken one month off work at [omitted for publication] on the recommendation of his doctor and then after that time resumed his employment until quitting at the end of January 2016. [ 61 ] In January 2017 he moved from Abbotsford to Maple Ridge after finding out that M.A.G. and the child had moved there.

He moved to follow the child since he didn’t have a vehicle at the time and wanted to be able to exercise parenting time. He was working with Work BC in Maple Ridge to help find employment and attended the recreation centre across the street. At the recreation centre he saw M.A.G. and she saw him. He immediately went to the police station and told them what happened due to his heightened concern about any possible breach allegation as he was now subject to an FLA Protection Order.

He subsequently moved back to Abbotsford to look for employment to avoid any potential interaction with M.A.G. [ 62 ] He has no bank account right now as his credit rating is low. He has $20,000 of family debt. He is not in contact with his mother or siblings. He obtained housing through [omitted for publication]. He was on social assistance for two months in 2017. [ 63 ] In cross-examination further evidence was elicited from him. [ 64 ] After quitting his job at [omitted for publication] he did not search for new employment until January 2017. He paid for the counselling sessions with T.V.

Initially he attended one time per week but due to the cost he had to reduce visits to one time per month. He also has sought some counselling through the Salvation Army and Ravens Moon but the quality of counselling was better with T.V. [ 65 ] During 2016 he was homeless for most of the time. He was in financial ruin. He had criminal legal fees and family legal fees. He had to pay for child visits. He had to pay for his counselling. [ 66 ] He recalls being served with Supreme Court documents regarding the properties but he didn’t respond.

His money was running out and he didn’t pay the lawyer that he had consulted. [ 67 ] He only made one child support payment himself and all other payments have been taken from the monies being held by FMEP from his share of the sale of the properties. [ 68 ] He does not intend to work as a carpenter for a number of reasons. He has no vehicle. He no longer has tools. He doesn’t want to work outside in the rain due to arthritis. He needs to find a job that is close to transit and does not require graveyard shifts. He believes graveyard shifts contributed to the decline of his mental health.

Since he quit his job at [omitted for publication] he lost his seniority and does not intend to pursue similar work as a longshoreman due to the shift-work. The shift-work took a massive toll on his body and he felt like a zombie.

[ 69 ] During the relationship with M.A.G. he was abused emotionally, psychologically, verbally, financially, and physically by her. When things got bad at the house he left voluntarily in order to avoid an escalation of their arguments. [ 70 ] He agreed that he shut off the hot water tank in the house on one occasion because he believed the children were using too much water. He agreed he screwed the laundry door shut on one occasion since the children were forgetting to close the laundry room door and the dog was getting in and eating the kitty litter.

He felt by doing this the message would get across and the children would remember to shut the door. He believes he unscrewed the door and things went back to normal after only one day. He agreed he smashed light switch plates when the lights were not turned off. He agreed that he once smashed the lightbulb in J.G.’s room. [ 71 ] He agreed that in the December 2004 he punched the fridge after being accused by M.A.G. of inappropriately bathing the child. After punching the fridge he left the house. He can’t recall how long he stayed away.

He sometimes went camping after arguments. [ 72 ] He agreed that he had four firearms at the time of separation. The original rifle was bought new for $400 but the others were bought used. He always possesses pocketknives for everyday use. [ 73 ] He still consumes alcohol three days out of the week and sometimes more depending on what he is having for dinner. He usually drinks hard liquor such as whiskey, scotch or vodka. He agreed he suffered from mood swings during the relationship but believes it was due to the way he was being treated, his general environment and shift-work was playing havoc on him.

He agreed that sometimes during the relationship he was consuming a lot of alcohol as he was self-medicating. [ 74 ] He denied the suggestion that he quit work with [omitted for publication] to thwart M.A.G.’s application for child and spousal support. However he agreed that during their relationship on occasion he threatened to quit work if she did not obtain employment and help with the bills. [ 75 ] He denied the suggestion that he was trying to track the whereabouts of M.A.G. and the child and that was how he was able to locate them in Maple Ridge.

He only assumed they moved to Maple Ridge because that’s where M.A.G.’s mother lives. Later he recalled that former counsel for M.A.G. had mentioned Maple Ridge in a court appearance. [ 76 ] He has made no efforts at finding better paying employment. He is happy with his present work. He is waiting for the outcome of this trial and then he will move back to Maple Ridge to access his daughter, and probably look for new housing and a new job. Submissions on behalf of M.A.G. [ 77 ] M.A.G. is entitled to both child and spousal support based on an imputed income to J.L.A. of $93,013.

This is based on his declared 2014 tax return. J.L.A. is intentionally underemployed and capable of earning considerably more than $27,000 per year. There is no medical evidence to support his decision to have quit his well-paying job. [ 78 ] J.L.A. is responsible for the child A.A. plus the two youngest children that he is a step-father to. He is subservient to the biological father of the two boys so the amount of $707 should be deducted from his obligation unless the support would be greater for the child A.A. alone. [ 79 ] Spousal support in the mid-range on an ongoing basis is warranted.

This was an eight year relationship and M.A.G. has not had an opportunity to become self-sufficient. [ 80 ] M.A.G. is entitled to spousal support on a compensatory and non-compensatory basis. Regarding compensatory she did have a job at the beginning of the relationship but gave it up to move to Mission to live with J.L.A. and take care of A.A. when she was born. While she stayed at home taking care of the children he was able to go out and further his career. He continued unfettered in his career while she was a homemaker. [ 81 ] Regarding the non-compensatory basis her means and needs justify an award.

She has no ability to earn substantial income at this time. She expected that he would take care of her on an ongoing basis. Her share of the division of assets may have an impact on the non- compensatory considerations. [ 82 ] J.L.A. should not be allowed any parenting time with A.A. There is a history of anger, abuse and damage to the house. A.A. is afraid of J.L.A. and fearful of him. J.L.A. is not in a position to care for the physical and emotional needs of the child. J.L.A. has not dealt with his anger management issues that are evident from his past conduct.

He has antisocial tendencies and there are a number of red flags. There is the violence in the home, the ongoing consumption of alcohol, lack of stable housing, cutting off all visits with the child in January 2016, and unusual behaviour like buying his daughter a parrot for Christmas after separation without any consideration of who would be responsible to care for the pet. He has valuable job skills but chooses to work in a low paying job. [ 83 ] M.A.G. provided evidence in support of the protection order being sought.

She is fearful of J.L.A. and the basis for her fear is objectively discernible based on J.L.A.’s past behaviour. She feels threatened by him. Submissions by J.L.A. [ 84 ] He does not plan to exit his child’s life. He and M.A.G. made a decision to have a child together which requires a level of cooperation between them. M.A.G. has lied, misled the police, and broken court orders. [ 85 ] S.C. gave biased evidence and lacked recall of her file. She could not recall whether M.A.G. had attended the sessions where it was clear from the evidence of M.A.G. that she had. Her evidence should be excluded.

The counselling with S.C. caused A.A. more harm than good. [ 86 ] The supervised visit reports indicate no concern or fear but show a good relationship with his daughter. He has a strong bond with the child and was involved in all aspects of her life prior to the separation.

[ 87 ] There was family violence over a one-year period with three incidents of physical damage to the home. The other incidents are exaggerated and falsified. M.A.G. sought legal counsel in 2014 and started to document and manufacture evidence for court purposes but he accepts responsibility for his actions. The damage he caused was to inanimate objects not people. His ability to co-parent is not impaired. [ 88 ] He has sought counselling for the abuse he has suffered in the relationship. M.A.G. shows controlling behaviour to him and the children.

He wishes to retain guardianship and be involved in decisions affecting the child’s life. He requests an order that M.A.G. be evaluated for her mental fitness as a parent. Her actions continue to damage all of her children. [ 89 ] He denies quitting his job to thwart payment of support. He has never refused or denied support.

In January 2016 he stopped working for medical reasons and not for any ulterior motive. [ 90 ] From October 2015 to November 2016 M.A.G. did not have housing costs, as the family residence was in foreclosure, so his child support should be adjusted for that period of time. [ 91 ] In 2016 he worked the month of January and earned approximately $4,000. Also in 2016 he cashed out RRSPs and pensions in the approximate amount of $44,000. The banks withheld $22,000 from that amount. [ 92 ] In January 2017 he started to look for new employment and now earns $27,000 per year.

The child support payments should be based on this level of income and not imputed at a higher level. [ 93 ] M.A.G. is receiving child support for three children and her housing costs only started in December 2016 when she moved to Maple Ridge after the properties were sold. Her older boys are employable. Requiring him to support her and the children amounts to undue hardship on him. [ 94 ] Concerning her son P.G. he was four years old when they commenced residing together. He’s acted as a father to this child and is willing to pay child support for him but would like an order for access.

He appreciates he has not applied for that in this proceeding but will do so in the future. [ 95 ] Spousal support puts him in undue hardship. He should not be required to pay anything and the amounts already taken from him should be returned. All the family debts were placed on him after separation and all assets given to her. He also could not attend at her residence to even retrieve his belongings. M.A.G. lied to the police about the alleged assault that never happened. [ 96 ] M.A.G. refuses to work even though A.A. started full-time school in the 2012/2013 school year.

During their relationship she agreed she would return to work full-time after all children were in full-time school. She hasn’t returned to any employment even though it’s over five years that the child started full-time school. There was an agreement between them to share the financial burden on the family but he has had to endure the entire burden. A marriage is not a pension plan. [ 97 ] His parenting time should be reinstated. He has not committed any crime or breached any court order over the last three years.

He has no desire for legal trouble and it was his last arrest in January 2016 for an alleged breach that did not occur that led to these circumstances. [ 98 ] M.A.G. claims to fear him but there is no rational reason for this ongoing claim of fear. The level of fear has only been increasing for no objective reason. He has had no contact with her for a long time but her fear seems to only increase. There is no reason for the continuation of a protection order. [ 99 ] He has been under court orders for three years now and there have been no breaches. He has followed every court order and direction.

Moreover he has been under orders due to false allegations that led to charges but those charges were stayed by Crown Counsel. He has not attempted to track the whereabouts of M.A.G. and his child but he is aware that they are presently living in Maple Ridge. [ 100 ] M.A.G. has a history of alienating children from their fathers and she did this with her first relationship. [ 101 ] He intends to keep his present address private until he is granted parenting time with his daughter. He does not trust M.A.G. with this information.

He has a healthy relationship with his daughter and he was fully involved with her life. She is not estranged or frightened of him. He wants a co-parenting arrangement or a parenting coordinator to assist. Analysis [ 102 ] I found M.A.G. to be a reliable witness. She had a detailed recollection of events. Her evidence was internally consistent and consistent with the external circumstances. I reject J.L.A.’s submission that M.A.G. has given false evidence, misled police or broken court orders, except possibly in relation to the January 27, 2016 scheduled telephone access that was not facilitated.

Unfortunately, that one missed telephone access put into motion a series of events that could not have been anticipated. I also accept J.L.A.’s complaint that M.A.G. unjustifiably for a period of time interfered with his Ann Davis supervised visits and he had to seek a remedy by way of court application on December 2, 2015 to have Ann Davis continue as the supervising agency. [ 103 ] Over the eight year relationship M.A.G. endured periodic angry outbursts by J.L.A. that included intentional property damage as set out above.

These outbursts created a fearful environment for M.A.G. and the children. [ 104 ] Although J.L.A. acknowledges some of his violent behaviour he minimizes its impact on the family and believes that he is the victim of financial and emotional abuse. I accept that he worked very hard and financially supported his family for 8 years; however, M.A.G.’s lack of work outside the home during the marriage cannot be characterized as a form of abuse towards him by any objective standard.

[ 105 ] It is concerning that over the last two and a half years J.L.A. has not made more concerted efforts to address the root causes of his uncontrolled outbursts which he knew would be the focus of this hearing. I accept that he has attended for some counselling but the nature of that counselling and the results are unknown.

He has not disclosed any clinical records from the treating counsellor or produced any reports. [ 106 ] It seems to me that after his arrest on January 27, 2016 for a breach of his recognizance of bail that might have been unwarranted, as he was attempting to make contact with M.A.G. to exercise his scheduled telephone parenting time as permitted by his recognizance, he suffered an emotional breakdown. This led to a series of irrational and consequential decisions by him. He quit his well-paying job where he had some seniority without inquiring about disability or leave options.

He stopped exercising his parenting time with A.A. He did not respond to the Supreme Court divorce action that could have had a different result with his participation. With no income he became unable to deal with his debts, lost the few assets he had, and became homeless for a period of time. [ 107 ] I accept J.L.A.’s heartfelt desire to resume a healthy relationship with A.A. and to be a father to her. I also accept that he has no intention of causing her any harm or fear especially now that the stress of his relationship with M.A.G. has ended. He also has no intention of causing M.A.G. a reason to fear him.

He has scrupulously avoided any potential contact with her and agreed to stay out of Maple Ridge to avoid any possible inadvertent meeting. J.L.A. does not want to create any potential situation that could lead to a police complaint against him and the possibility of his arrest. [ 108 ] Despite the past history of family violence I see a path forward to re-establishing a relationship between J.L.A. and A.A. that would be in her best interests.

But that path forward will require supervised visits for a period of time for them to reconnect and then unsupervised visits in the community before consideration of more extensive parenting time or parental responsibilities.

I find that J.L.A. is not in a stable position to assume a significant parenting role that he desperately desires and believes is in A.A.’s best interests. [ 109 ] As indicated above, I am not satisfied that J.L.A. has made sincere efforts to address some of the troubling issues that have been explored on this hearing including his violent outbursts during the relationship, alcohol use, and his possible emotional or mental breakdown in January 2016. He has presented no independent evidence of the counselling he has attended or how he intends to address the legitimate ongoing concerns about his mental health.

His life still seems to be in a state of instability. His housing, employment and finances are in a state of flux.

His present employment is clearly below his skills and abilities. [ 110 ] In this case it would be advisable, before a court considers a significant change to the parenting scheme being ordered and contemplated by this judgment, for J.L.A. to participate in an assessment by a mental health professional and take any program of treatment as might be recommended to manage his condition and reduce any potential risk to the child. [ 111 ] The mental health professional chosen by J.L.A. should be given a copy of these reasons for judgment and confirm that it has been reviewed and considered in the assessment process.

If a further application is made for more parenting time or parental responsibilities the court will consider ordering a s.211 views of the child report. The child will be older then and perhaps willing to participate. Best Interests Factors [ 112 ] There are several factors to consider in determining what parenting arrangement is in the best interests of a child. The overriding concern is determining what is in the best interests of a child. [ 113 ] A child has the right to be safe, secure and protected from violence. This is made clear in a number of places in legislation.

Section 37 of the Family Law Act requires that any order made by a court concerning guardianship, parenting arrangements or contact with a child must consider the best interests of the child who is the subject of that order. The importance of the child’s safety is made clear in subsection (3) which states:

(3) An agreement or order is not in the best interests of a child unless it protects, to the greatest extent possible, the child's physical, psychological and emotional safety, security and well-being. Subsection (2) sets out what a court must consider in determining what is in the best interests of a child. This includes the following: (

a) the child's health and emotional well-being; (

b) the child's views, unless it would be inappropriate to consider them; (

c) the nature and strength of the relationships between the child and significant persons in the child's life; (

d) the history of the child’s care; (

e) the child’s need for stability, given the child’s age and stage of development; (

f) the ability of each person who is a guardian or seeks guardianship of the child, or who has or seeks parental responsibilities, parenting time or contact with the child, to exercise his or her responsibilities; (

g) the impact of any family violence on the child’s safety, security or well-being, whether the family violence is directed toward the child or another family member; (

h) whether the actions of a person responsible for family violence indicate that the person may be impaired in his or her ability to care for the child and meet the child’s needs; (

i) the appropriateness of an arrangement that would require the child’s guardians to cooperate on issues affecting the child, including whether requiring cooperation would increase any risks to the safety, security or well-being of the child or other family members;

(

j) any civil or criminal proceeding relevant to the child's safety, security or well-being. [ 114 ] When I consider these factors in relation to J.L.A. I make the following findings: (

a) the child’s health and emotional well-being: Although there is evidence that the child has some fear and anxiety associated to her father’s violent behaviour in the home, the supervised visits from October 2015 to January 2016 were positive and without any suggestion of concern. Although the child might need some reassurance from M.A.G. or a counsellor, I find the resumption of parenting time as soon as can be arranged with her father is best for her health and emotional well-being in the short and long term. (

b) the child's views, unless it would be inappropriate to consider them: The child has some fear and anxiety in relation to her father’s past behaviour but by reference to the supervised visit reports she continues to love him and enjoys spending time with him. (

c) the nature and strength of the relationships between the child and significant persons in the child's life. The child had a strong relationship with her father until he cut off contact with her at the end of January 2016. (

d) the history of the child's care: The child was in the joint care of the parties since her birth in 2008 until their separation in 2015. Since that time the child has been in the sole care of M.A.G. (

e) the child's need for stability, given the child's age and stage of development: This factor favour’s maintaining the present status quo with the child residing full time with M.A.G. and having regular visits with her father. (

f) the ability of each person who is a guardian or seeks guardianship of the child, or who has or seeks parental responsibilities, parenting time or contact with the child, to exercise his or her responsibilities: As indicated above the court has concerns about J.L.A.’s stability over the last two years and as such this factor supports the status quo. (

g) the impact of any family violence on the child's safety, security or well-being, whether the family violence is directed toward the child or another family member: Based on the history of family violence as set out above, this factor favours supervised and unsupervised visits in the community going forward. (

h) whether the actions of a person responsible for family violence indicate that the person may be impaired in his or her ability to care for the child and meet the child's needs: This factor also favours that J.L.A.’s parenting time be supervised at first and then unsupervised in the community going forward until such time as he seeks and obtains appropriate counselling to address the underlying issues discussed above. (

i) the appropriateness of an arrangement that would require the child's guardians to cooperate on issues affecting the child, including whether requiring cooperation would increase any risks to the safety, security or well-being of the child or other family members: At this point in time M.A.G.’s anxiety surrounding contact or communication with J.L.A. is such that any parenting arrangement must be through third parties with exchanges of the child in public places. (

j) any civil or criminal proceeding relevant to the child's safety, security or well-being: This factor does not apply. Application of the best interests factors Guardianship [ 115 ] The court is satisfied that both parties are guardians of A.A. under s. 39(1) of the Family Law Act . The parties resided together for 8 years, and raised the child together from her birth until their separation. Accordingly, M.A.G.’s application for sole guardianship is dismissed.

Parenting Time [ 116 ] Under section 45(3) of the Act , a court may order that parenting time with a child, be supervised if the court is satisfied that supervision is in the best interests of the child. Section 37(3) of the Act requires that for an order to be in the best interests of a child, it must protect, to the greatest extent possible, the child's physical, psychological and emotional safety, security and well-being. [ 117 ] At present supervised parenting time for J.L.A. is appropriate and in the best interest of the child for several reasons.

J.L.A. has not seen the child in over two years; the child has a fear of him, and he has undiagnosed and untreated mental health issues that have led to this situation. However, the previous supervised parenting time sessions were successful as reported on by Ann Davis Transition

Society. I expect the supervised visits to be successful and this will lead to unsupervised visits in the community. [ 118 ] Accordingly, I make the following Orders: • M.A.G. will have all parenting time with A.A. except for the parenting time granted to J.L.A. • J.L.A. will have parenting time with A.A. for two full hours (not including any travel time) every second weekend commencing the weekend of March 24, 2018. This parenting time will be supervised by a professional supervising agency to be chosen by J.L.A. and will take place in Maple Ridge, BC.

J.L.A. will provide a copy of these Reasons for Judgment to the supervising agency prior to any visits being arranged. All costs associated with the supervised parenting time, including any travel costs, will be borne by J.L.A.

J.L.A. will advise counsel for M.A.G. of the contact information for the supervising agency and M.A.G. will contact the agency to provide her contact information and co-operate in making the logistical arrangements for J.L.A.’s parenting time to proceed. • If not contrary to the supervising agency’s policy, J.L.A. shall be permitted to give A.A. small appropriate gifts including but not limited to greeting cards and gift cards if reviewed and approved of by the visit supervisor. • The child P.G. may attend the supervised visits if requested by J.L.A. and agreed to by M.A.G. and P.G., and if it can be accommodated by the supervisor. • The parties will attend at the case manager’s office to

schedule a 30 minute review hearing to be heard not before June 25, 2018. The review will be to determine whether it is in the child’s best interests to move forward with unsupervised parenting time for J.L.A. as anticipated in this decision. J.L.A. will file with the registry all supervision reports and other documents he intends to rely on at least two days prior to the scheduled hearing and provide a copy of the reports and documents to counsel for M.A.G.

I will remain seized of all applications regarding this file until the scheduled review. • M.A.G. shall not change the residence of the child from Maple Ridge, BC, without the consent of J.L.A. or order of this court. Parental Responsibilities [ 119 ] The child’s primary residence has been with M.A.G. since separation in 2015. M.A.G. has exercised all parental responsibilities since that time. The child is doing well and M.A.G. is a capable parent. In all of the circumstances this status quo is in the best interests of the child.

Accordingly I make the following Order: • Under s.40(3) of the FLA , M.A.G. will have all of the parental responsibilities for the child A.A. Spousal support [ 120 ] The parties were in an eight year relationship from 2007 to 2015. M.A.G. brought her three children from a previous marriage into the relationship who were approximately 3, 7 and 8 years old in 2007. She left her retail job after meeting J.L.A. and was a homemaker thereafter.

A.A. was born [omitted for publication]. [ 121 ] There is disagreement between the parties as to whether M.A.G. would return to work after A.A. started attending school full time. M.A.G. is working on completing her grade 12 education and expects to accomplish that by June 2018. She intends to pursue an Education Assistant program after that. She is now looking for part time to full time work. During the relationship J.L.A. was able to pursue his career while M.A.G. attended to the needs of the family. M.A.G. would have been more advanced in her own employment or career if not for this relationship.

M.A.G. received $160,000 as part of the division of assets in the divorce proceeding. [ 122 ] Sections 160 to 162 of the Family Law Act address the issue of spousal support: Duty to provide support for entitled spouse 160 If, after considering the objectives set out in

section 161 [objectives of spousal support] , a spouse is entitled to spousal support, the other spouse has a duty to provide support for the spouse in accordance with

section 162 [determining spousal support] . Objectives of spousal support 161 In determining entitlement to spousal support, the parties to an agreement or the court must consider the following objectives: (

a) to recognize any economic advantages or disadvantages to the spouses arising from the relationship between the spouses or the breakdown of that relationship; (

b) to apportion between the spouses any financial consequences arising from the care of their child, beyond the duty to provide support for the child; (

c) to relieve any economic hardship of the spouses arising from the breakdown of the relationship between the spouses; (

d) as far as practicable, to promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time. Determining spousal support 162 The amount and duration of spousal support, if any, must be determined on consideration of the conditions, means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse, including the following: (

a) the length of time the spouses lived together;

(

b) the functions performed by each spouse during the period they lived together; (

c) an agreement between the spouses, or an order, relating to the support of either spouse. [ 123 ] In these circumstances M.A.G. is entitled to spousal support on a compensatory basis. Considering all of the circumstances of the relationship and its aftermath, spousal support will be payable from October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019 inclusive at the mid-level. By 2020 M.A.G. should achieve self-sufficiency.

Since the duration of support is limited to just over four years the mid-level amount is fair and reasonable. [ 124 ] After considering several factors including the length of the relationship, the needs of M.A.G. following the marriage breakdown, the standard of living enjoyed by the parties during the marriage, and the division of family assets, I am not satisfied that the evidence supports spousal support on a non-compensatory basis. [ 125 ] I urge J.L.A. to obtain accounting and tax advice as to the implications of the spousal support payments being ordered as they are generally considered tax deductible for the payor.

Income of the parties [ 126 ] I am satisfied on the evidence that J.L.A.’s income for support purposes should be imputed and not based on his income from his present employment. I find that J.L.A. is voluntarily underemployed considering his capacity to earn income. He made a rash decision in January 2016 to terminate his well-paying employment without seeking disability leave or accommodation if leave was medically supported. He has presented no medical or other evidence to support his inability to return to work as a longshoreman or carpenter.

Accordingly, considering his reported income from 2011 to 2015 I impute a yearly income to him of $80,000. [ 127 ] I am also satisfied and find M.A.G. is underemployed. At the time of separation all of her children were in school or completed school. As at February 2018, three of her children are in full time school and the eldest has completed school. She has presented no medical evidence to support an inability to work part time. M.A.G. has the capacity for minimum wage work and for retraining for higher paying employment.

Considering a minimum wage of between $11-12, and the ability to work at least 20 hours per work, I impute a yearly income of $12,500 from October 2015 to December 2017. By January 2018 M.A.G. should have completed her high school credits and her re-training. If she had re-trained as an Education Assistant she would be earning approximately $25,000 per year on a part-time basis (see makeafuture.ca). Accordingly, commencing January 2018 I impute an income to her of $25,000 per year. [ 128 ] In terms of child support calculations, J.L.A. acted as a parent to M.A.G.’s three other children for an eight year period.

His financial support of these children is secondary to their biological father who is paying child support to M.A.G. Based on some DivorceMate calculations and submissions of counsel for M.A.G., it appears that whether the calculations made take into consideration one child or the 4 children (from which amount is deducted the child support obtained from the primary payor), the results are similar.

Accordingly, the support calculation being made will be based on one child, and M.A.G.’s application for child support for the older three children will be adjourned generally and may be reset for hearing if necessary. [ 129 ] Based on these findings and by reference to DivorceMate calculations I arrive at the following calculations. • Based on imputed income of $80,000 the Child Support Guidelines indicate from October 1, 2015 to November 22, 2017 the support payable by J.L.A. is $748 per month.

From December 1, 2017 to present the guideline amount is $765 per month. • For the period of October 1, 2015 to December 2017 the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines “With Child Support” Formula indicates “Low 925, Mid 1150 and High 1396”. For the period starting January 1, 2018 the guideline amounts are: Low 463 Mid 739 High 1016. As indicated above the mid-level amount is appropriate in this case.

J.L.A.’s request for reduction of support during the property foreclosure period is dismissed. [ 130 ] In the event that either or both parties take issue with the accuracy of the support calculations made in this judgment they will have 30 days from the filing of this judgment to file with the registry written submissions with attached DivorceMate printouts in support. [ 131 ] Accordingly I make the following orders: • J.L.A. is found to be a resident of British Columbia and is imputed to have a gross annual income of $80,000. • M.A.G. is found to be a resident of British Columbia and is imputed have a gross annual income from October 1, 2015 to December 1, 2017 of $12,500 and a gross annual income of $25,000 commencing January 1, 2018. • J.L.A. will pay to M.A.G. the sum of $748 per month for the support of the child, A.A. born [omitted for publication] on the first of the month from October 1, 2015 to November 1, 2017 and $765 per month from December 1, 2017 and continuing on the 1 st day of each and every month thereafter, for as long as the child is eligible for support under the Family Law Act or until further Court order. • J.L.A. will pay to M.A.G. for her support the sum of $1150 per month commencing October 1, 2015 and continuing on the 1 st day of each and every month thereafter until December 31, 2017.

From January 1, 2018 and continuing on the 1 st day of each and every month thereafter until December 31, 2019 J.L.A. will pay to M.A.G. for her support the sum of $739 per month, at which time spousal support is terminated. Protection Order [ 132 ] Protection Orders were created under the Family Law Act . They replaced what used to be known as “Restraining Orders” under the old Family Relations Act . They are made to protect an at-risk family member from family violence.

Based on the evidence taken on this hearing including J.L.A.’s behaviour during the relationship, and his behaviour since the separation, I am unable to conclude that

family violence is likely to occur at this time or that M.A.G. or the children are at risk. I appreciate and accept that M.A.G. continues to be fearful of J.L.A. I intend to address her concerns and those of J.L.A. with mutual conduct orders. Accordingly the Protection Order of this court dated February 22, 2018 is cancelled.

Conduct Orders: • Under s.225 of the FLA , M.A.G. and J.L.A. will have no direct or indirect contact with each other except through a supervised parenting time agency to arrange J.L.A.’s supervised or unsupervised parenting time, through counsel, while in attendance at a court proceeding, or further order of this court. • Neither party will attend within 100 meters of the residence, school or workplace of the other. • J.L.A. will not attend within 100 meters of the residence, school, or workplace of A.A., D.G., J.G. and P.G.

Summary of Orders [ 133 ] The court is satisfied that both parties are guardians of A.A. under s.39(1) of the Family Law Act . [ 134 ] M.A.G. will have all parenting time with A.A. except for the parenting time granted to J.L.A. [ 135 ] J.L.A. will have parenting time with A.A. for two full hours (not including any travel time) every second weekend commencing the weekend of March 24, 2018. This parenting time will be supervised by a professional supervising agency to be chosen by J.L.A. and will take place in Maple Ridge, BC.

J.L.A. will provide a copy of these Reasons for Judgment to the supervising agency prior to any visits being arranged. All costs associated with the supervised parenting time, including any travel costs, will be borne by J.L.A.

J.L.A. will advise counsel for M.A.G. of the contact information for the supervising agency and M.A.G. will contact the agency to provide her contact information and co-operate in making the logistical arrangements for J.L.A.’s parenting time to proceed. [ 136 ] If not contrary to the supervising agency’s policy, J.L.A. shall be permitted to give A.A. small appropriate gifts including but not limited to greeting cards and gift cards if reviewed and approved of by the visit supervisor. [ 137 ] The child, P.G. may attend the supervised visits if so requested by J.L.A. and agreed to by M.A.G. and P.G. and if it can be accommodated by the supervisor. [ 138 ] The parties will attend at the case manager’s office to

schedule a 30 minute review hearing to be heard not before June 24, 2018. The review will be to determine whether it is in the child’s best interests to move forward with unsupervised parenting time for J.L.A. as anticipated in this decision. J.L.A. will file with the registry all supervision reports and other documents he intends to rely on at least two days prior to the scheduled hearing and provide a copy of the reports and documents to counsel for M.A.G.

I will remain seized of all applications regarding this family file until the scheduled review. [ 139 ] M.A.G. shall not change the residence of the child from Maple Ridge, BC, without the consent of J.L.A. or order of this court. [ 140 ] Under s.40(3) of the FLA , M.A.G. will have all of the parental responsibilities for the child A.A. [ 141 ] The Protection Order of this court dated February 22, 2018 is cancelled. [ 142 ] Under s.225 of the FLA , M.A.G. and J.L.A. will have no direct or indirect contact with each other except through a supervised parenting time agency to arrange J.L.A’s supervised or unsupervised parenting time, through counsel, while in attendance at a court proceeding, or further order of this court. [ 143 ] Neither party will attend within 100 meters of the residence, school or workplace of the other. [ 144 ] J.L.A. will not attend within 100 meters of the residence, school, or workplace of A.A., D.G., J.G. and P.G. [ 145 ] M.A.G. is entitled to spousal support from J.L.A. on a compensatory basis.

Spousal support will be payable from October 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019 inclusive. [ 146 ] J.L.A. is found to be a resident of British Columbia and is imputed to have a gross annual income of $80,000. [ 147 ] M.A.G is found to be a resident of British Columbia and is imputed have a gross annual income from October 1, 2015 to December 1, 2017 of $12,500 and a gross annual income of $25,000 commencing January 1, 2018. [ 148 ] J.L.A. will pay to M.A.G. the sum of $748 per month for the support of the child A.A. born [omitted for publication] on the first of the month from October 1, 2015 to November 1, 2017 and $765 per month from December 1, 2017 and continuing on the 1 st day of each and every month thereafter, for as long as the child is eligible for support under the Family Law Act or until further Court order. [ 149 ] M.A.G.’s application for child support for the three older children is adjourned generally and may be reset for hearing if necessary. [ 150 ] J.L.A. will pay to M.A.G. for her support the sum of $1150 per month commencing October 1, 2015 and continuing on the 1 st day of each and every month thereafter until December 31, 2017.

From January 1, 2018 and continuing on the 1 st day of each and every month thereafter until December 31, 2019 J.L.A. will pay to M.A.G. for her support the sum of $739 per month, at which time spousal support is terminated. [ 151 ] For as long as the children are eligible to receive child support, the parties will exchange: (

a) copies of their respective income

tax returns for the previous year, including all attachments, not later than June 30 each year; and, (

b) copies of any Notice of Assessment or Reassessment provided to them by Canada revenue Agency, immediately upon receipt. The exchanges will occur by filing the said documents at the Abbotsford Court Registry. [ 152 ] J.L.A. will also file his income tax return for 2016 by June 30, 2018 and file a copy of it and any Notice of Assessment or Reassessment provided to him by Canada Revenue Agency with the Abbotsford Court Registry. ___________________________________ The Honourable Judge J.I.

SOLOMON Provincial Court Judge CORRIGENDUM - Released July 31, 2018 In the REASONS FOR JUDGMENT dated March 5, 2018 , the following changes have been made: [1] Paragraph 59 should read: From September 9, 2015 to January 23, 2016 he exercised supervised parenting time with A.A. through Ann Davis Transition Society. [2] Paragraph 114 (

m) should actually be paragraph (j). [3] Paragraph 127 should read: I am also satisfied and find M.A.G. is underemployed. _____________________ J.I. SOLOMON Provincial Court Judge