By: Jennifer Blackwood
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Please contact the Law Office of Jeff Jiehui Li, or another experienced family lawyer if you are concerned about your family law issues.
Child Support
Prior to its amendment in 1997, section 33(7) of the Family Law Act prioritized the support obligation of a natural or adoptive parent over that of a step-parent. Today, however, no predominance is given to a natural or adoptive parent. In some circumstances, a step-parent may be ordered to pay support to a biological or adoptive parent. In others, a biological or adoptive parent may be ordered to pay support to a step-parent.
In terms of support, both the FLA and the Child Support Guidelines recognize that, there can be more than two parents. A “child” is defined by the FLA as “a person whom a parent has demonstrated a settled intention to treat as a child of his or her family…” This specifically contemplates that a step-parent may assume a parental role and become liable for support. A step-parent’s “settled intention” is objectively determined through conduct. Some considerations include: where the child lived, how the child’s expenses were paid, interest in the child’s welfare and responsibilities for the child’s care.
It is important to note that once a settled intention has been demonstrated by a step-parent, it cannot be unilaterally withdrawn. A step-parent’s subsequent change in intention does not abdicate or remove the obligation to support. Further, the nature of the relationship between the parents is not a relevant factor in determining child support obligations. Any contributions to be paid by a biological parent are viewed independently of a step-parent’s obligation. A step-parent’s contribution does not make an Application to the Guidelines unreasonable.
Spousal Support
Where a payor spouse gets remarried, the support obligations to the first family must be balanced with the interests of the second family. A reduction spousal support may be warranted where a payor spouse has established an inability to provide the support he or she was paying previously. Although remarriage is a change in circumstances, it is not a justification for the first family to endure hardship. A payor spouse cannot defer to new family responsibilities to avoid support obligations to his or her first family.
Recohabitation itself is not indicative of financial independence and does not preclude a recipient spouse from receiving maintenance. The nature and extent of the new relationship and whether it is important enough to warrant a variation of a spousal support order depends on the circumstances of each case.
A variation to a spousal support obligation may be warranted where the economic hardship that arose from the breakdown of marriage no longer exists. This may be where a recipient spouse gets remarried and his/her capacity to contribute to his/her own support is bolstered by the sharing of household expenses with a new cohabitation partner. The self-sufficiency of a recipient spouse and the contribution of a new partner are important considerations in reevaluating support, especially where the support is needs-based.
The effect of remarriage on support can be complicated. If you need assistance with your family law issues from a solutions-driven firm that is experienced in resolving family disputes efficiently, feel free to contact our office at (416) 800-7196.