Offices in Ottawa and Perth
(613) 722-1500

CONTACT US (613) 722-1500

What You Need to Know About Canada’s Changing Approach Towards Child Support Arrears

What You Need to Know About Canada’s Changing Approach Towards Child Support Arrears

By:

Mann Lawyers

Posted May 19, 2021

A recent decision in the case of Michel v. Graydon has resulted in a change to the way all provinces will be addressing child support arrears moving forward.

The Supreme Court of Canada published a unanimous eighty-three-page decision on the issue of child support arrears being claimed by Ms. Michel. This case is receiving landmark status because previous case law limited recipients of child support from seeking arrears going back more than three years, and from seeking arrears for a child who was no longer a “child of the marriage.” This placed the burden of bringing a claim for arrears in a timely fashion upon the support recipient, and enabled payors to simply try to wait out the enforceability of their obligation.

Prior to Graydon, D.B.S. v S.R.G., [2006] 2 SCR 231, (“D.B.S.”) was the precedent by which Canadian courts addressed child support arrears. It set out three principles:

  1. Child support is the right of the child and a parent cannot barter away a child’s right to support. Parents have an obligation to support their children in an amount proportionate with their income, as required by the Child Support Guidelines.
  2. In determining whether to award retroactive child support, payors’ interests in certainty must be balanced with fairness to the child and the need for flexibility. All factors must be examined, including the reason the recipient delayed in seeking child support, the conduct of the payor, the past and present circumstances of the child, and whether the retroactive award might entail hardship for the payor.
  3. If the recipient is found to be entitled to a retroactive award, generally the award should go back to the date the recipient provided effective notice to the payor, but to no more than three years unless the payor has engaged in blameworthy conduct.

The Supreme Court in Graydon distinguished its decision from D.B.S. on the eligibility point, on the basis that D.B.S.’s bar awarding arrears once a child reached adulthood was limited to original child support orders under s. 15.1 of the Divorce Act. Justice Martin suggested that even this narrow exception was “ripe for reconsideration.” The court held that D.B.S. did not decide the issue on variation of existing orders.

The Court cited policy considerations including the feminization of poverty and the legislative goals of meeting the best interests of children. The Court recognized the “gender dynamics in child support law” and the need to acknowledge the gendered nature of intimate partner violence, unpaid domestic work, lower wages due to pay inequity, as well as the burden of childcare responsibilities (para 100). The S.C.C. also considered the marginalization of women, compounded by the intersections of “race, disability, religion, gender modality, sexual orientation, and socio-economic class”— factors that the bench must consider during legal analysis in matters of child support (para 101). To procedurally bar historical child support claims “prevents access to justice, runs counter to the best interest of many children, gives rise to an under-inclusive outcome, and reinforces patterns of socio-economic inequality” (para. 72).

While Michel v. Graydon originated in the Superior Court of British Columbia, we can expect to see the impact of this decision here in Ontario. Payors should be aware that updating changes to their income is likely not sufficient – they will need to pay child support amounts in accordance with those changes. The onus of ensuring payment is being made in accordance with the Guidelines is shifting from the recipient to the payor. This case underscores the principle that child support is the right of the child, and will be firmly enforced by the courts.

This blog post was written by Michelle Williams, a member of the Family Law team.  She can be reached at 613-369-0362 or at michelle.williams@mannlawyers.com.

More Resources

Blog |
Business Law
By: 

Posted June 18, 2024

This is an update on my earlier blog posted in 2022 titled “New Requirements for Private Federal Corporations to Report Individuals with Significant Control Coming[...]
Blog |
Estate Litigation
By: 

Posted June 11, 2024

“For it is in giving that we receive.” –Francis of Assisi Many of us grew up hearing this mantra. Good people give back. Generous people[...]
Blog |
Real Estate
By: 
What is title? “Title” is a legal term for a person or company’s rights of ownership in a private property. This is different from a[...]
Blog |
Wills, Trusts and Estates, Business Law, Real Estate
By: 

Posted May 28, 2024

The recent announcement from the Federal Government regarding an increase in the capital gains inclusion rate for individuals, trusts, and corporations has sparked significant discussion.[...]
Blog |
Family Law
By: 
When couples part ways, the shared ownership of a matrimonial home often becomes a contentious issue. In Ontario, the law recognizes two forms of co-ownership:[...]
Blog |
Real Estate
By: 
If you are purchasing a home in Ontario, you likely know that you should retain a real estate lawyer to close the transaction for you.[...]
Michelle Williams

Michelle Williams

I graduated with undergraduate degrees in both Criminology and Family Studies from the University of Western Ontario and went on to obtain my law degree from Queen’s University in 2018. I articled at a mid-sized family law firm in the Greater Toronto Area. After being called to the bar in 2019, I worked at a multiservice firm in Oshawa, Ontario, where I gained ample courtroom experience. I have worked on appeal matters and argued numerous motions both in person and in writing. During the unprecedented court closures in the spring of 2020, I continued to work without pause. I have successfully argued numerous urgent motions that have helped to shape how Ontario courts address family matters such as parenting time, international travel, and children in crisis during COVID-19. Much of my practice following my call to the bar has been comprised of high conflict parenting disputes. This expanded my skills in... Read More

Read More About Michelle Williams

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

"*" indicates required fields

Name*
Consent*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.