Sentences with phrase «equalization payments in»

Many Albertans find it rich that Quebec — which provides families with subsidized daycare and offers university tuition at less than half the rate of other provinces — criticizes Ottawa for capping equalization payments in 2009 to the rate of the economy's increase.

The ONCA was quick to point out that the issue was moot as the bankruptcy eliminated the equalization payment in any event.

Following trial, the husband declared personal bankruptcy (eliminating the equalization payment in favor of the wife).

Not exact matches

That's the per capita figure for the $ 1.1 billion in territorial formula financing (equalization payments) given to Nunavut in the 2011 - 2012 fiscal year.

It's too bad we couldn't get our oil to the refinery on the east coast, so they wouldn't have to import so much product from Saudi Arabia... Alberta's frustrations... blocked from both directions... stuck... land locked... after years of paying billions of dollars in equalization payments to help the rest of Canada.

Indeed, transfers and regional equity are enshrined in Section 36 of the 1982 Constitution Act and Section 36 (2) reads: «Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.»

Premier Kathleen Wynne is demanding that Flaherty compensate Ontario for slashing $ 641 million from its equalization payments, while Quebec's Parti Quebecois government warned against any «ugly surprises» in this year's budget that could provoke new squabbles.

Spouses must provide full and frank financial disclosure before agreeing to the value and method of the equalization payment, or risk having the agreement scrutinized and invalidated by a court in the future.

Even if the contract had allowed the husband to avoid any equalization payment, a court would likely have awarded the wife support in an amount totalling what the husband eventually paid her by way of settlement.

This was a motion for security for costs of the appeal, on the grounds that the wife's appeal of a spousal support and equalization payment order was frivolous and vexatious and that the wife had insufficient assets in Ontario to pay the costs of the appeal.

Ms. Ruizhen represented in her e-mail that she allegedly living in China and was seeking to retain my firm to assist her with the collection of an outstanding property settlement equalization payment, in the sum of $ 468,450 USD.

The appellant husband argued that (1) the trial judge erred in how he ordered the equalization payment to be paid; and (2) this error led the trial judge to make a further error with respect to his costs award, as it resulted in the trial judge failing to properly assess the reasonableness of the appellant husband's offers to settle.

In Dodman, the ONCA explained that you don't need to self - fund your own equalization payment.

The trial judge refused to take into account the wife's costs of disposing of her shares in calculating the equalization payment, on the basis that there was a lack of evidence as to what the parties» intentions were with their shares as at the date of separation.

[In contrast to support claims, equalization payment debt does not survive bankruptcy.]

In this quasi-family law proceeding, the wife sought to force the sale of a property belonging to her former husband to satisfy an equalization payment owing to her.

This meant the wife could take steps to have those funds used in satisfaction of her equalization payment entitlement.

In light of this and other developments, the wife applied to a motions judge for an order that his ongoing child and spousal support obligations be converted to a lump - sum amount in the same amount as the equalization payment would have been, i.e. $ 50,00In light of this and other developments, the wife applied to a motions judge for an order that his ongoing child and spousal support obligations be converted to a lump - sum amount in the same amount as the equalization payment would have been, i.e. $ 50,00in the same amount as the equalization payment would have been, i.e. $ 50,000.

Note that this outcome pertains to unpaid equalization payments only, which readers will know is the amount that spouses must pay to each other in order to equalize their respective Net Family Property as part of their division of assets.

We've talked recently in Can the Post-Bankruptcy Distinction Between Support and Equalization Payments be Circumvented?

And — no doubt to the chagrin of a spouse who is owed and expecting an equalization payment — the bankrupt spouse is released from that claim once his or her bankruptcy has been discharged in the usual manner.

From a legal standpoint, the motion judge's ruling effectively circumvented the distinction in law between the types of award: Unpaid equalization payments got swept into the husband's bankruptcy and evaporated once he was discharged, while spousal support obligations did not.

That is, the date of separation will be set out in the Separation Agreement, and is used to determine a number of issues for the separation (including property settlement and equalization, financial disclosure forms, pension forms, divorce application forms, and support payments).

In Gomez v. McHale, a case where the marriage lasted 9 months and the cohabitation period was less than five years (triggering s. 5 (6)(e) of the FLA), the ONCA refused to increase the appellant's equalization payment.

The important thing to know is that spousal support can and may be ordered, in addition to child support and the equalization payment.

In response to (1), the ONCA noted that «this is not how summary judgment motions work» and held that the motion judge properly considered the evidence, applied the statutory framework, and determined the appropriate equalization payment.

The motion judge held that, pursuant to s. 5 (6)(e) of the Family Law Act (which allows a judge to depart from the standard equalization payment calculation if the resulting amount would be «disproportionately large» in light of a cohabitation period of less than 5 years), the equalization payment that the wife would otherwise receive ($ 268,000) should be reduced to $ 60,000.

In Bolt v. Bolt, 2006 CarswellOnt 1490, 2038, [2006] O.J. No. 968 (S.C.J.), the wife's equalization payment amounted to just under $ 500,000 at the time of trial.

This case affirms that the mathematical formula used in some cases (whereby a cohabitation period of four years has led to the equalization payment being reduced to 4/5 = 80 % of what it would otherwise be, and a three year cohabitation period has led to the equalization payment being reduced to 3/5 = 60 % of what it would otherwise be, and so on) is not the only «right» way these short relationship cases can be decided.

The trial judge had agreed with the husband and found that the payments were property and thus subject to equalization in the same way that a pension would be.

In Thibodeau the Ontario Court of Appeal addressed the legal impact of bankruptcy on a spouse's entitlement to receive an equalization payment.

Counsel should keep this case in mind for clients who seek to appeal final orders where a single payment from a spouse, i.e., an equalization payment is not more than $ 50,000 or the periodic payments awarded do not amount to more than $ 50,000 (exclusive of costs) in the 12 months commencing on the date of the first payment.

The court below found that, because the arbitrator had directed the equalization payment to be paid from the husband's share of the proceeds of sale, the award created an equitable trust in favour of the wife over the husband's share of the net proceeds of sale, in priority to other creditors.

Fortier v. Lauzon (2017 ONSC 7503) father — equalization payment — interest in the matrimonial home — pension — occupation rent Justice M. Shelston

By fashioning the equalization payment / compensation order into a maintenance order, the Court in Darby was able to shape a bankruptcy - proof order.

In the context of determining their respective Net Family Property amounts for the purposes of equalization, a legal question arose as to whether the wife's annuity payment entitlement should be counted as «property» or as «income» as those terms are used in the Ontario Family Law AcIn the context of determining their respective Net Family Property amounts for the purposes of equalization, a legal question arose as to whether the wife's annuity payment entitlement should be counted as «property» or as «income» as those terms are used in the Ontario Family Law Acin the Ontario Family Law Act.

In a short judgment, the province's top court ruled in favour of the husband, who claimed that the couple's original separation agreement barred a fresh equalization payment when they split up agaiIn a short judgment, the province's top court ruled in favour of the husband, who claimed that the couple's original separation agreement barred a fresh equalization payment when they split up agaiin favour of the husband, who claimed that the couple's original separation agreement barred a fresh equalization payment when they split up again.