Goddard v Goddard, 2022 ABKB 770

Court of King’s Bench of Alberta Citation: Goddard v Goddard, 2022 ABKB 770 Date: 20221122 Docket: 4803 176656 Registry: Edmonton Between: James Ryan Goddard Plaintiff - and - Joelle Kelley Goddard Defendant Corrected judgment: A corrigendum was issued on January 30, 2023; the corrections have been made to the text and the corrigendum is appended to this judgment. Corrected judgment: A corrigendum was issued on December 1, 2022; the corrections have been made to the text and the corrigendum is appended to this judgment. _______________________________________________________ Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice C.L. Arcand-Kootenay

_______________________________________________________ Introduction [ 1 ] The parties disagree on whether the father has outstanding legal obligations for child support and spousal support, and they also disagree on the father’s parenting time with the children. [ 2 ] The mother is requesting ongoing child support and spousal support. [ 3 ] The parties are also seeking a final distribution of matrimonial debts and assets. [ 4 ] This matter was set for a trial on June 15 to 17, 2020 but could not proceed due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Issues [ 5 ] The issues before me are as follows:

(1) Parenting;

(2) Ongoing and retroactive child support;

(3) Ongoing and retroactive spousal support; and,

(4) Distribution of matrimonial debts and assets. Analysis of Facts and the Law [ 6 ] Briefly, the facts are as follows: [ 7 ] September 2006: Cohabitation commences. At this time, both Ms. Goddard (“the mother”) and Mr. Goddard (“the father”) are working full time. The father is in the trades, an ironworker and welder. He is working with the Ironworkers Union Hall with jobs in Edmonton, Fort McMurray, and Saskatchewan. [ 8 ] The mother is working in administration in the insurance industry, with Pro Forma Capital. In 2002 to 2005, she completed 2 of 3 years towards an Applied Accounting Degree at NAIT.

The mother gave evidence that her income was $30,000 per year with Pro Forma Capital. [ 9 ] December 2006: The mother and father bought a duplex in Edmonton. [ 10 ] March 2007: The mother begins maternity leave. [ 11 ] June 7, 2007: Eva Rachelle Goddard is born. [ 12 ] July 3, 2008: Hope Ryan Goddard is born.

In 2008, the father started his welding apprenticeship [ 13 ] May 14, 2009: The mother and father marry in Belize. [ 14 ] October 2009: The mother and father move to an acreage near Spruce Grove. [ 15 ] In 2010: The father obtained his welding ticket. [ 16 ] October 22, 2012: The father is employed at Syncrude, Exhibit #32. His

schedule is 6 days on/6 days off, and he also works overtime hours. [ 17 ] January 15, 2013: Leo Norman Goddard is born. [ 18 ] November 2014: The mother and father move to another acreage near Devon. The first acreage has not sold but is being rented out to another family. [ 19 ] June 2015: The mother returns to the workforce and commences part time work in the same industry and with the same boss, but a different company, that she worked with prior to maternity leave. The mother is now self-employed. [ 20 ] May 2016: The mother and father ceased cohabitation. The mother and children stayed in the marital home.

The parents agree to a shared parenting regime, although the father continues to work a 6/6 shift at Syncrude as well as overtime. [ 21 ] May 2018: The mother and children move to Devon. [ 22 ] August 2018: The father moves into the marital home.

The father stops paying the mortgage on or about December 2018 and commences bankruptcy proceedings. [ 23 ] On or about 2019: The marital home and the acreage near Spruce Grove are sold, and or foreclosed on. [ 24 ] January 4, 2020: The mother and father agree that the father will have parenting time every second weekend with the children. [ 25 ] February 24, 2020: The father left work at Syncrude and returned to his Ironworkers Union Hall in Edmonton. [ 26 ] August 2020: The mother and children move to a rental, specifically her mother’s home, in St. Albert.

[ 27 ] August 2021: The father relocates to B.C. and is working for Union Hall 97. The father is also retraining towards a Project Management Certificate, with NAIT. He states he wants to “get off the tools”. Parenting [ 28 ] The Divorce Act , RSC 1985, c.3 (2nd Supp .) at s. 16 states the best interests of the child: The court shall take into consideration only the best interests of the child of the marriage in making a parenting order or a contact order. [ 29 ] And the factors to be considered are contained in subsection (3): In determining the best interests of the child, the court shall consider all factors related to the circumstances of the child, pursuant to (

a) to (

j) and in particular: (

e) the child’s views and preferences, giving due weight to the child’s age and maturity, unless they cannot be ascertained; [ 30 ] I had an opportunity to speak with the children in chambers to ask what their views and preferences were regarding parenting time with their father. I provided a brief synopsis of the children’s views and preferences to the parents prior to their giving closing arguments. [ 31 ] I find it is in the children’s best interests to maintain the status quo which both parents have conceded.

The mother will continue to be the children’s full-time caregiver. [ 32 ] Regarding the father’s parenting time, he will have a minimum of one weekend per month in Alberta during the school year. The father can establish routines with the children on weekends during the school year.

He can help them with their homework and get them to their activities, and he gets the benefit of spending every hour of each day with the children. [ 33 ] If the father wishes to exercise this parenting time, he will contact the mother at least two weeks in advance to confirm the weekend he intends to exercise his parenting time in Alberta. He will also provide confirmation to the mother of where the children will be staying during his parenting time. [ 34 ] In the summer months, the father will have the following parenting time:

a) Two weeks in July and two weeks in August with Leo.

b) One week in July and one week in August with Hope.

c) One week in July and one week in August with Eva. [ 35 ] The father is to provide the mother with notice of the dates he wishes to exercise his summer parenting time by May 15 of each year. [ 36 ] It is suggested that Hope and Eva have separate weeks during the summer months, to allow for one girl to travel to or from B.C. with Leo. [ 37 ] The father will be responsible for all costs associated with his parenting time. [ 38 ] Regarding decision making, all powers, responsibilities and entitlements, and decision making about the children shall be the mother’s sole responsibility. [ 39 ] The father remains entitled to make inquiries and to be given information about any significant matter that arises in connection with the children. [ 40 ] I would encourage the parties to communicate through OurFamilyWizard, or through use of any other app of their choice if they continue to have concerns regarding positive and healthy communication.

This is not mandatory, but simply a recommendation. Child Support [ 41 ] I am guided by the Federal Child Support Guidelines in my consideration on the issue of child support. I must consider s. 1(

a) of the Guideline s which states: To establish a fair standard of support for children that ensures that they benefit from the financial means of both spouses after separation . I must also consider s.3(1): Presumptive Rule 3(1) Unless otherwise provided under these Guidelines, the amount of a child support order for children under the age of majority is (

a) The amount set out in the applicable table, according to the number of children under the age of majority to whom the order relates and the income of the spouse against whom the order is sought; and (

b) The amount, if any, determined under

section 7. (3) “Applicable Table” The applicable table is (

a) if the spouse against whom an order is sought resides in Canada, (

i) the table for the province in which that spouse habitually resides at the time the application for the child support order or for a

variation order in respect of the child support is made. Determination of Annual Income 15(1) Subject to section (2), a spouse’s annual income is determined by the Court in accordance with sections 16 to 20. Calculation of Annual Income 16 Subject to sections 17 to 20, a spouse’s annual income is determined using the sources of income set out under the heading “Totalincome” in the T1 General Form issued by the Canada Revenue Agency and is adjusted in accordance with

Schedule III. Imputing Income 19(1) The court may impute such amount of income to a spouse as it considers appropriate in the circumstances, which circumstancesinclude the following: (

a) The spouse is intentionally under-employed or unemployed, other than where the under-employment or unemployment isrequired by the needs of a child of the marriage or any child under the age of majority or by the reasonable educational or health needs ofthe spouse; (b) … (c) … (

d) It appears that income has been diverted which would affect the level of child support to be determined under these guidelines; (e) …. (

f) The spouse has failed to provide income information when under a legal obligation to do so; (g) … (h) … (i) … Adverse inference 23 Where the court proceeds to a hearing on the basis of an application under paragraph 22(1)(a), the court may draw an adverseinference against the spouse who failed to comply and impute income to that spouse in such amount as it considers appropriate. [42] The mother lives in the Province of Alberta.

The father moved to Chilliwack B.C. on or about August 2021 and now resides inthe Province of British Columbia. [43] The applicable tables are for the Province of Alberta up to and including August 2021, and then the Province of B.C.thereafter. [44] The primary issue for child support is determining the father’s income and quantum. [45] In the matter before me, the father gave evidence that he worked 6 days on and 6 days off at Syncrude in Fort McMurray,which included two days of travel thus he was only available to parent the children 4 overnights or 5 days during his shift rotations.

Thisis approximately 10 days per month, maximum.

Based on the father’s own evidence, I find that the father did not have the children in hiscare 40% of the time since the date of separation. [46] I find that the mother and father agreed to the father having parenting time every other weekend commencing January 2020. [47] I also find that since the father relocated to Chilliwack, B.C., he has only exercised parenting time twice with the children inover a year. [48] I find based on the foregoing, that the mother was the primary caregiver, and the father had the children less than 40% of thetime, therefore, income splitting is not an issue for child support.

Retroactive Child Support [49] The Supreme Court of Canada in D.B.S. v. S.R.G. 2006 SCC 37 , [2006] 2 SCR 231, set out the test and legalprinciples to apply in determining whether retroactive orders should be granted. [50] In D.B.S. v. S.R.G., the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that retroactive child support orders are neither rare norexceptional, and stated the following general principles: Child support is the right of the child, and a parent cannot barter away a child’s right to support, as per Willick v. Willick, (SCC), [1994] 3 SCR 670.

Parents have an obligation to support their children in an amount commensurate with their income, asrequired by the Child Support Guidelines. This obligation, and the child’s right to support, exist independently of any statute or courtorder.

[ 51 ] Recipient and payor parents both have the responsibility to ensure the correct amount of child support is paid.

While child support orders should provide payors with the benefit of predictability, and a degree of certainty in managing their affairs, such orders do not absolve payors or recipients of the responsibility of continually ensuring that the child is receiving an appropriate amount of support. [ 52 ] The outcome of retroactive applications is highly dependent on the facts. [ 53 ] In the matter before me, both the mother and father have conceded the issue of child support should be considered since the date of separation.

If I am wrong, the evidence regarding the effective date of notice found below in “spousal support”, indicates the notice given to the other parent of an intention to seek retroactive child support was less than three years; thus, I find that the test in D.B.S. , supra, is not triggered in the matter before me. [ 54 ] The mother and father both conceded that the father paid the mortgage and other family debt and should be credited for the full amount of his in-kind support as the full amount of child support owing for the period May 2016 to December 2017. [ 55 ] The evidence of both the mother and father was the father was paying $4,250 per month for in kind support, specifically for the mortgage, utilities, and her van. [ 56 ] The father gave evidence that he also provided additional money to the mother from time to time and upon her request, which the mother did not dispute.

In cross examination the mother was asked if the father was sending her money, and she said “yes, I remember you sending me money for family related things.” [ 57 ] Further, the father’s Royal Bank Personal Deposit History, Exhibit #13, shows bi-weekly mortgage payments of $1,551.05 for the months of January to March 2018. The payment matches the bi-weekly mortgage payment for the months of March 2017 to December 2017. I note the mother gave evidence that the father had made the mortgage payments until the end of December 2017. The evidence contained in Exhibit #13, prove otherwise.

The father continued making the mortgage payments beyond December 2017. [ 58 ] I also find that in the mother’s own evidence, Exhibit #48, she gives the father credit for child support payments made in the amount of $3,800 per month for the months of January to March 2018. [ 59 ] The mother and children were living in the matrimonial home at this time. [ 60 ] Based on all the foregoing, I find the father will have a further credit for these three months (January to March 2018) of mortgage and other in-kind payments for a total of $11,400. [ 61 ] The mother’s evidence was that she and the children remained in the marital home until the start of May 2018, and then moved to Devon as she could not afford to pay the mortgage.

I note this is two months after the father stopped making those payments directly. [ 62 ] As stated in D.B.S. , supra , “Child support is the right of the child, and a parent cannot barter away a child’s right to support”. I will consider the father’s guideline amount for child support for the years in question but will apply the credit conceded above. [ 63 ] In Exhibit #37, the mother’s exhibit, it shows the father’s 2013 line 150 at $219,182; 2014 line 150 at $280,538; and his 2015 line 150 at $252,211.

I find this is evidence that even while married, the father’s income fluctuated up and down, year to year. [ 64 ] The mother has asked that I impute income to the father for overtime. I am not imputing an income to the father for overtime. It would not be reasonable to do so. The mother has not met her burden of proof to do so. [ 65 ] I find the father’s evidence regarding his banked overtime reasonable and accept his evidence.

The father stated that the banked overtime was not automatically paid to him, and he chose to use it as time off in lieu of for the following reasons: his mental health; and he only worked overtime to service family debt load, and he could not keep up with the debt anyways. Base Table Child Support [ 66 ] Based on the Child Support Guidelines , the father’s base table Child Support Guideline amount for the period May 2016 to December 2016 is set at $4,696 per month at an annual income of $268,000 for 2016.

The mother’s income for this calendar year was $23,000, her Exhibit #51. [ 67 ] The base table Child Support Guideline amount commencing January 1 for the 2017 calendar year is set at $4,210 per month at an annual income of $238,000. The mother’s income was $10,000 based on her oral evidence. [ 68 ] For the 2018 calendar year, I find the father’s income was $228,052 based on his Notice of Assessment, Exhibit #31; and the mother’s income was $12,000 based on oral evidence.

Based on the Child Support Guideline , the father’s base table child support for that year is set at $4,048 per month commencing January 1, 2018. [ 69 ] For the 2019 calendar year, I find the father’s income was $180,000 based on oral evidence; and the mother’s income was $14,000 based on oral evidence. Based on the child support guidelines, the father’s base table child support for that year is set at $3,270 per month commencing January 1, 2019. [ 70 ] For the 2020 calendar year, I find the father’s income was $201,000 based on oral evidence; and the mother’s income was $19,000 based on oral evidence.

Based on the child support guidelines, the father’s base table child support for that year is set at $3,610 per month commencing January 1, 2020. [ 71 ] For the 2021 calendar year, I find the father’s income was $201,000 based on oral evidence and information contained in

Exhibit #1; and the mother’s income was $23,175 based on her Notice of Assessment, Exhibit #55. Based on the Child Support Guidelines , the father’s base table child support for January to July is set at $3,610 per month, and for the months of August to December is set at $3,598. As of August 2021, the father had relocated to B.C.

Retroactive and Ongoing for the 2022 Calendar Year [ 72 ] For the 2022 calendar year, I find the father’s income will be $201,000 based on the following: the father’s evidence was that he moved to B.C. because “it is very busy in B.C. right now, so lots of opportunities there, more so than in Alberta”. In cross examination the father was asked “you made more money in Syncrude than in B.C. despite calling B.C. a worker’s market. Do you consider $120,000 less than the money earned at Syncrude?” The father answered: “Yes”.

I query based on the father’s own evidence, why is he alleging his income went down after he relocated to B.C. [ 73 ] I find the father made inconsistent statements in his evidence, and I do not believe him regarding his potential 2022 income. I find it is reasonable to impute an income to him of $201,000 based on the history of his income for the two years prior and based on the decision in Peters v. Atchooay , 2022 ABCA 347 , which overturned Hunt v. Smolis-Hunt , 2001 ABCA 229 .

The father’s base table child support for the 2022 year is set at $3,598, as he is residing in B.C. [ 74 ] For the 2022 calendar year, the mother’s income will be imputed to her at $23,175 based on the evidence she provided regarding the income she earned in 2021, and her own evidence contained in Exhibit #60,

Summary of Child Support Guidelines, where she includes her guideline income as at $23,000. I find it is reasonable based on the evidence before me to impute income to her. [ 75 ] The total base table child support guideline amount owing by the father is $298,464 . [ 76 ] If I am wrong in either the mother or father’s actual income for 2022, the parties are required to share financial information every year and will have the Alberta Child Support Recalculation Program available to them.

I will continue to include the Recalculation Program as a term of this Order. [ 77 ] Based on the evidence, I find the father has made the following child support payments for the period May 2016 to October 2022: [ 78 ] Oral evidence of both the mother and father, $4,250 per month for the period May 2016 to Dec 2017; 20 x $4,250 = $85,000 . [ 79 ] Exhibit #48, $3,800 per month for the months of January to March 2018, $3,800 x 3 = $11,400 . [ 80 ] Exhibit #57, Maintenance Enforcement Program, Creditor Statement of Account, $190,731.23 for the period May 2018 to October 2022 (approx. $4061/month) [ 81 ] For a total of base table child support payments made by the father equaling $287,131.23 , which is subtracted from the amount owing of $298,464.00 for a total amount outstanding of $11,332.77.

Section 7 Expenses [ 82 ] The parents conceded in oral evidence that they will share the

section 7 expenses, 50/50. [ 83 ] Accordingly, I will make that order. [ 84 ] The items listed in s.7 (1)(

b) to (

f) of the Federal Child Support Guidelines will be included in the term of the order regarding

section 7 expenses. Only those expenses will be reimbursed by either party, upon proof. Spousal Support [ 85 ] In making my determination regarding spousal support I am mindful of the 4 objectives of spousal support set out in s.15.2(6) of the Divorce Act and have paid careful attention to the mother’s progress towards self-sufficiency. I note that this is not a question of showing “dire need” but is a legal entitlement if appropriate based on the Act . [ 86 ] The issue is not entitlement, as the father concedes entitlement. The issue is quantum and duration.

Spousal support order 15.2(1) A court of competent jurisdiction may, on application by either or both spouses, make an order requiring a spouse to secure or pay, or to secure and pay, such lump sum or periodic sums, or such lump sum and periodic sums, as the court thinks reasonable for the support of the other spouse. Terms and conditions

(3) The court may make an order under subsection (1) or an interim order under subsection (2) for a definite or indefinite period or until a specified event occurs, and may impose terms, conditions or restrictions in connection with the order it thinks fit and just. Factors

(4) In making an order under subsection (1) or an interim order under subsection (2) the court shall take into consideration the condition, means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse, including (

a) the length of time the spouses cohabited ; (

b) the functions performed by each spouse during cohabitation; and (

c) any order, agreement or arrangement relating to support of either spouse. … Objectives of spousal support order

(6) An order made under subsection (1) or an interim order under subsection (2) that provides for the support of a spouse should (

a) recognize any economic advantages or disadvantages to the spouses arising from the marriage or its breakdown; (

b) apportion between the spouses any financial consequences arising from the care of any child of the marriage over and above any obligation for the support of any child of the marriage; (c)relieve any economic hardship of the spouses arising from the breakdown of the marriage; and (d)in so far as practicable, promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time. (emphasis added) [ 87 ] Based on the evidence of the mother and father, the parties started to cohabit in September 2006, were married on May 14, 2009, and ceased co-habiting on May 16, 2016. [ 88 ] I find the mother and father co-habited for a period of 9 years. [ 89 ] I also find the father was aware of the mother’s application/claim for spousal support upon service of the Counterclaim for Divorce and Division of Matrimonial Property, filed on August 2, 2016, by the Plaintiff by Counterclaim, Joelle Kelley Goddard, wherein she claimed, “spousal support from the Plaintiff for compensatory and non-compensatory relief of the Defendant’s contributions during the marriage.”, Exhibit #44 [ 90 ] And, the Family Application by the Applicant, Joelle Kelley Goddard, filed May 23, 2017, wherein the mother sought “An Order directing that the Respondent pay Child Support and Spousal Support to the Applicant”., Exhibit #45 [ 91 ] And further, the Family Application by James Ryan Goddard filed May 29, 2018, wherein the father’s relief sought was “an interim child support and spousal support order…” Exhibit #50. [ 92 ] Thus, spousal support was an issue that both parties were aware of and had notice of as of May 29, 2018, less than three years from the original date of trial, June 15 to 17, 2020. [ 93 ] Based on the foregoing, I find there is no issue regarding retroactive spousal support and the test in D.B.S. , supra .

Retroactive Spousal Support [ 94 ] At marriage breakdown: [ 95 ] At the time the parties began co-habiting, the mother was employed in the insurance industry as an Administrator and had completed 2 of 3 years towards an Applied Accounting Degree at NAIT. [ 96 ] Based on her own evidence, the mother was employed and trained at the date of co-habitation and was making an income of $30,000 per year in 2007, 15 years ago. [ 97 ] The father was an ironworker and welder.

He obtained his welding ticket in 2010. [ 98 ] The father was the breadwinner while the mother stayed at home after the birth of the first child and only re-entered the work force when the youngest child was 1 year of age.

At that time, the mother became self-employed in the insurance industry, initially in administration and then she moved into bookkeeping, both part time. [ 99 ] The father has been employed in the same industry, ironworker, and welder, prior to and during the marriage. [ 100 ] When the marriage broke down in May 2016, the mother was not disadvantaged as she had education, training, and a part time job which she was able to do remotely, while the father continued in his job.

The youngest child would have been 3 ¼ years at that time, and the two older children were already in school full time. [ 101 ] I find that the mother could have moved towards full time work once the youngest child started full time school in 2019. However, she remained working parttime and has continued working parttime for the past three years. The mother gave evidence that she intends to move to full time work “in the near future”. The children are currently 15, 14 and 9 years of age. They are far from infants who require a full time stay at home parent.

Indeed, the two older children are now working part time.

[ 102 ] Although the father has conceded entitlement up to the date the youngest child began school full time, I will still review the law regarding entitlement as the mother may be entitled to spousal support beyond that date. [ 103 ] Compensatory spousal support is awarded because of an economic disadvantage caused by the marriage.

It can also be based on child-rearing and other matters related to lost earning capacity after the separation. [ 104 ] I find the mother’s ability to engage in full time work was decreased due to her providing full time care for the youngest child who was still at home at the time of separation until September 2019, when he would have entered grade one. For a period of 3 ¼ years. [ 105 ] Once the youngest child entered full time schooling, the mother should have been able to engage in full time work. [ 106 ] The mother’s evidence was that she was working part time as a bookkeeper since 2015.

She was trained as a bookkeeper prior to co-habitation with the father. I find the mother was back in the same labour market that she was employed in prior to the birth of the first child. She could have overcome the economic disadvantages caused by the marriage breakdown and could have been able to meet her needs if she was gainfully employed ie. full time. [ 107 ] I find the mother’s claim for compensatory support ended in September 2019. I find the mother was not making reasonable efforts to achieve self-sufficiency, when all the children were in school, and she made the choice to continue working part time.

Her own evidence was that her income prior to the birth of the first child in this same field was $30,000 per year. [ 108 ] Non-compensatory support is need-based. Married couples tend to become economically interdependent, namely one spouse may require support from the other to meet basic needs after the marriage.

Non-compensatory support is meant to address the economic hardship resulting from the divorce or if one spouse’s standard of living declines significantly from the standard during the marriage. [ 109 ] The mother gave evidence that she was not able to meet basic needs for the children and herself upon the marriage breakdown.

However, the mother did not provide any evidence as to what shortfall she may have had other than she had to rent a smaller house in Devon with only three bedrooms for the period May 2018 to July 2020. [ 110 ] During this time, the mother’s evidence was that the children continued in all their extracurricular activities: gymnastics; volleyball; basketball; theatre; piano; hockey.

I do not see a change in the standard of living but for the smaller house the mother stated they were living in in Devon. [ 111 ] I find the mother’s standard of living did not decrease from the date of separation to July 2018, as she continued to reside in the matrimonial home while the father made all mortgage payments and contributed to other household expenses such as insurance and utilities, and the mother’s van payment.

The father was also paying child support during this period. [ 112 ] Thus, I find the mother was entitled to non-compensatory support for the period of May 2018 to July 2020 where there was a drop in the standard of living with the move to Devon, however I do not find it was a significant drop as there was no evidence as to the difference in the housing as between the matrimonial home versus the home in Devon, other than the number of bedrooms in the Devon home. [ 113 ] I am satisfied for all the reasons above that the mother is legally entitled to an award of spousal support, compensatory and non- compensatory up to September 2019, and non-compensatory only from September 2019 up to July 2020. [ 114 ] I have reviewed the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines for the period noted above.

The Guidelines remain voluntary, informal, and advisory. They are not legislated. I find that determining the appropriate quantum of spousal support is not as simple as plugging income figures into software. Spousal support is a matter of judicial discretion taking into consideration those matters set out in the Divorce Act specifically the means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse, including:

a) The length the spouses cohabited. They cohabited for 9 years. Their lives were not intertwined for a significant period of time.

b) The functions performed by each spouse during cohabitation. The father was the breadwinner, and the mother was a stay-at- home mom, and then a secondary earner.

c) Any order, agreement or arrangement relating to the support of either spouse. There were interim without prejudice orders granted leading up to this trial. [ 115 ] I am also mindful of the objectives of spousal support:

a) To recognize the economic advantages or disadvantages to the spouses arising from the marriage or its breakdown. As noted above. b) ...

c) Relieve any economic hardship of the spouses arising from the breakdown of the marriage. Here the father was servicing all the family debt from the date of separation. The mother conceded the father was servicing family debt for the period May 2016 to December 2018. I also note that the mother remained in the matrimonial home and was not paying any debt arising from the marriage breakdown until she moved to Devon in May 2018 and started paying rent.

d) In so far as practicable, promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time. As noted above, the mother could have moved towards self-sufficiency once the youngest child began school full time. [ 116 ] Based on the foregoing, for the period May 2016 up to and including July 2020, I am using my discretion based on the evidence before me and taking into account the considerations in the Divorce Act to award the mother spousal support in the amount of $1500.00 per month. For a total of $76,500 outstanding.

In August 2020 [ 117 ] I am awarding the mother non-compensatory spousal support starting August 2020 up to and including October 2022. The mother’s standard of living improved during this period, but she still needed spousal support to help her continue moving towards self- sufficiency.

The amount and reasons for it, will be discussed further below. [ 118 ] There is no definitive answer concerning a recipient’s remarriage or re-partnering contained in the spousal support advisory guidelines, however re-partnering is relevant as in the present case where the recipient’s financial situation appears to improve as a result. [ 119 ] Here, the mother’s own evidence is that she moved into her mother’s home in August 2020. [ 120 ] Based on the evidence before me, I find the mother’s financial situation improved because of this “re-partnering” with her mother.

I can find no evidence of a mortgage payment, rent payment, or any utility, power or sewer payment in her bank statements entered as Exhibit #18 and #19, by consent. Thus, she appears to be living rent and utility free since August 2020. [ 121 ] The mother’s bank statements from Scotiabank for the period May 2020 to August 2021, Exhibit #18 and #19 noted above, are evidence of the following:

i) She has regular withdrawals for alcohol and cannabis. ii) She makes withdrawals for purchases from Lowes, Home Depot, and Carpet Stores. iii) She makes withdrawals for Starbucks, a high-end coffee chain. iv) She has taken trips to Calgary/Drumheller and Banff.

v) She has withdrawals for skiing at both Rabbit Hill and Tawatinaw Ski Hill; and vi) She has odd withdrawals and partial refunds at the end of March and June 2021 for St. Albert Inn and Suites and the Stony Plain Best Western. [ 122 ] I do note that there are pages missing from the bank statements, but I find the pages that have been entered into evidence allow me to make findings of fact. One fact I find is that she is making withdrawals for what could be called renovations, as she gave evidence that she is paying for renovations at her mother’s home.

She said they are making a carriage house for her mother above the garage, but her mother reimburses her for these costs.

I see no evidence of reimbursement in the bank statements provided. [ 123 ] I also find as a fact, that the mother’s evidence supports the mother’s intention to reside with her own mother into the foreseeable future based on the building of the carriage house for her own mother. [ 124 ] Upon my further review of the mother’s bank statements I see no debits or withdrawals for debt she has given evidence that she is responsible for, specifically the Servus Credit Union debt, Credit Cards, RBC Line of Credit, and her mother’s loan.

However, I did note one debit for Devon Utilities on September 2, 2020, although she was no longer living in Devon at that time. [ 125 ] I also find that the mother always has money in her bank at months end, and often more than $1000 which provides me with a factual basis as to whether this mother, in fact, requires spousal support and if so, quantum. During this period, she was receiving $856 per month in interim without prejudice spousal support, which decreased to $150 per month in December 2021.

May 30, 2020, closing balance = $6,303.92 June 30, 2020, closing balance = $7,430.30 July 31, 2020, closing balance = $1,645.28 August 31, 2020, closing balance = $3,937.71 September 30, 2020, closing balance = $2,014.21 October 31, 2020, closing balance = $2,253.84 November 30, 2020, closing balance = $2,465.63 December 31, 2020, closing balance = $3,609.34 January 30, 2021, closing balance = $2,334.94 February 27, 2021, closing balance = $4,174.79 March 31, 2021, closing balance = $918.50 (and withdrawals totaling $10,663) April 30, 2021, closing balance = $3,507.51

May 31, 2021, closing balance = $2,090.11 June 30, 2021, closing balance = $358.42 (and withdrawals totaling $7,207.83) July 31, 2021, closing balance = $1,464.37 August 31, 2021, closing balance = $4,219.53 [ 126 ] I find, in contrast to the mother’s bank statements, Exhibit #13, which is the father’s bank statements, where the father’s bank statements mainly show withdrawals and or debits for debt, and not a single withdrawal for alcohol or cannabis purchases. [ 127 ] I find based on the evidence contained in the mother’s bank statements for the 2020 and 2021 calendar year, that she is moving towards self-sufficiency. [ 128 ] Based on the foregoing, I am awarding $750 per month for retroactive non-compensatory spousal support commencing August 1, 2020, up to and including October 1, 2022, for a total outstanding of $20,250 (27 months x $750).

Ongoing [ 129 ] I have considered the following in addition to the considerations I have made above: 1) The length of cohabitation, 9 years. 2) The length of the marriage, 7 years. 3) Disparity of income and each party’s ability to earn, and. 4) Age. [ 130 ] The mother’s ability to earn is the same as before the marriage and before the children were born. Before the marriage and birth of the children, she was already trained (Applied Accounting Degree) and working in the insurance industry. The mother returned to that same industry when the youngest child was 1 year of age.

Her parenting responsibilities should not have affected her ability to work full time since the youngest child entered full time school in September 2019. [ 131 ] Further, as she is self-employed and working remote, the pandemic should not have impacted her ability to earn an income. [ 132 ] The mother is also still quite young, 44 years of age. But, as noted she is already trained and working in an industry she has worked in previously. [ 133 ] Commencing November 1, 2022, spousal support shall be $375 per month until May 2025.

This will be at the 9-year mark after a 7-year marriage with 9 years of cohabitation. [ 134 ] Spousal support will be reviewed on or before May 2025 to determine whether the mother is entitled to ongoing support, specifically whether she has achieved self-sufficiency by that date. [ 135 ] In making the above decision, I am mindful of s.15.2(6) (d) “ in so far as practicable, promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time. ” This was a short-term marriage, 7 years, and short-term period of co-habitation, 9 years.

The mother was trained and employed in the industry that she is currently self-employed in albeit part time, and remotely. [ 136 ] My order is pursuant to s.15.2(1). This is a final order. Property Division [ 137 ] The Family Property Act , R.S.A. 2000, c F-4.7 , came into force on January 1, 2020. Given that the parties separated in 2016, the Matrimonial Property Act , R.S.A. 2000, c M-8 (“ MPA ”) applies: Family Property Act , s.39(2) . [ 138 ] Sections 7 and 8 of the MPA govern the distribution of property upon marriage breakdown. [ 139 ] Under

section 7, the Court is required to determine what property was owned by the spouses at the date of trial and whether any property is exempt from distribution. Then, considering the factors in s. 8, the Court must determine a just and equitable distribution of the matrimonial property as at the date of trial. Matrimonial Debt [ 140 ] As with assets, any debt which has been accrued during the period of the marriage but before the relevant date will be considered matrimonial debt regardless of whose name it is in.

Especially if the debt was for the benefit of the family, such as purchasing household goods, clothes, food, or vacations on a credit card. [ 141 ] I find that I am unable to make a final determination on the mother and father’s matrimonial assets and debts without further evidence.

[ 142 ] Specifically, I require further evidence on the following, before I can make a determination of the matrimonial debt and assets: 1. Bankruptcy. I direct the father to provide me with a list of all debt included in the bankruptcy. I direct that you identify each debt, the amount of the debt, and whether it was a joint debt, or an individual debt incurred by you after the date of separation. I also want proof of the amount of the debt as at the date of separation and as at the date the bankruptcy proceeded, if practicable. 2. Mother’s Visa Infinite Avion Credit Card, and RBC Line of Credit.

I direct the mother to provide me with proof of the amount owing on each debt as at the date of separation. 3.

Servus Credit Union Letter dated April 17, 2019; authorized overdraft currently outstanding. “Demand for payment in full of $14,999.10 should be satisfied on or before April 29, 2019.” I want proof from the mother as to whether payment has been made on this debt, as well as any other documents proving this debt and what it was for, that the mother may have in her possession. [ 143 ] This evidence is to be by Affidavit filed and served on the other party no later than November 29, 2022, and a copy provided to me through my Judicial Assistant. [ 144 ] If either party wishes to cross examine the other party on their Affidavit, they are to advise me by contacting my Judicial Assistant no later than December 1, 2022.

Arrangements will then be made for a one-day trial continuation for cross examination only on the Affidavits that have been filed. [ 145 ] My decision regarding joint matrimonial assets and debts is reserved pending receipt of further evidence as directed above. Divorce [ 146 ] The parties have leave to apply for a desk divorce. Conclusion [ 147 ] The mother shall have primary care of the children of the marriage, and sole decision-making responsibility.

The father is entitled to make inquiries and be given information about any significant matters. [ 148 ] The father shall have parenting time a minimum of one weekend per month in Alberta during the school year; four weeks in the summer with Leo; and two weeks in the summer with Hope and Eva. The father shall be responsible for all costs associated with his parenting time. [ 149 ] The father shall pay ongoing base table child support in the amount of $3,598 commencing November 1, 2022.

Child support shall be paid until the child reaches the age of 18; or until the child completes post-secondary studies if the child is over the age of 18 years. [ 150 ] Regarding child support, the standard clauses will be included regarding sharing financial information every year; payments are to be made to MEP; and that the recalculation clause will apply. [ 151 ]

Section 7 expenses will be shared 50/50 by the mother and father. [ 152 ] The father shall pay outstanding retroactive child and spousal support in the amount of $108.082.77, in the amount of $450 per month minimum until paid in full. [ 153 ] The father shall pay ongoing spousal support in the amount of $375 per month commencing November 1, 2022, until May 2025.

Spousal support will be reviewed on or before May 2025 to determine whether mother is entitled to spousal support beyond that date or whether she has achieved self-sufficiency. [ 154 ] The mother and father are directed to provide me with further evidence regarding matrimonial debt noted above. [ 155 ] The parties have leave to apply for a desk divorce. Either party can apply without the consent of the other. Heard on the 24 th day of October, 2022 to the 28 th day of October, 2022. Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta this 22 nd day of November, 2022. C.L. Arcand-Kootenay J.C.K.B.A.

Appearances: James Ryan Goddard Self-Represented Litigant Joelle Kelley Goddard Self-Represented Litigant _______________________________________________________ Corrigendum of the Reasons for Judgment of The Honourable Justice C.L. Arcand-Kootenay _______________________________________________________ Changes were made to the following paragraphs: 66, 75, 81, 152. The change in para 66 was made to reflect the correct Base Child Support amount owing. The change in para 75 reflects an income of 298,464.

The following paras 81 and 152 were modified to comply with the changes made at para 75. _______________________________________________________ Corrigendum of the Reasons for Judgment of The Honourable Justice C.L. Arcand-Kootenay _______________________________________________________ Changes were made to the following paragraphs: 75, 81, 116, and 152 In para 75 the total case table child support guideline amount owing has been changed to $299,024. The following paragraphs 81, 116, and 152 were modified to comply with the changes made at para 75.