Sentences with phrase «own equalization payment»

Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan received no equalization payments and Ontario became a recipient province getting about $ 171 per person.

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.

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.

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.

Who will be affected by decreased equalization payments from Alberta?

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.»

We don't have major federal funding earmarked for schools, but we do have equalization payments that (I believe) are more robust than the US federalist model.

As a common - law couple, no one is entitled to equalization payments — payments made from one spouse to another to create an equal division of the assets.

Question received: I have an equalization payment owed to me.

Answer: Yes, if your ex-husband is obligated to make an equalization payment that has been ordered prior to...

Another consideration is that if the deceased was married at the time of their death — to a step - parent, for example — that person may be entitled to an election under the Family Law Act to receive an equalization payment and make a potential claim against the estate.

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.

Canada has a federal process called «equalization payments.»

Kraft v. Kraft, 1999 CanLII 3732 (ON CA)-- Appeal granted to determine an appropriate equalization payment.

According to the Family Law Act, non-married couples are not entitled to the property division regime known as the equalization payment.

The equalization payment is intended to ensure that married spouses share equally the wealth they accumulate during the marriage.

A paying spouse can also borrow money from family and friends or take out a line of credit to make an equalization payment.

The right to an equalization payment does not permit a recipient spouse to force the sale or transfer of a specific property if the paying party can make the payment by some other means.

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.

Zavarella v. Zavarella 2013 ONCA 720 Family Law — Husband and wife — Marital property — Distribution orders — Equalization payments About two weeks before she was married, a future wife, with debts of $ 49,838.70, made an assignment into bankruptcy.

The plaintiff was to receive a nominal equalization payment.

The spouses cohabited for less than five years, and under equalization one spouse would receive a disproportionately large equalization payment.

The equalization payment, which only available to married spouses, is the payment owed to the spouse with a lower net family property (NFP).

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.

The clientalleged that the lawyer should have advised him to negotiate a «downside protection clause,» so that, if his income did not increase during the course of the marriage, he would not be obliged to make any equalization payment to his wife.

• Whether, if the lump - sum award is ordered, the recipient spouse is unlikely to receive any equalization payment or child support payments to which she is entitled.

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.

We did not seize the legislature or suspend equalization payments.

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.

The valuation date is important because the value of assets or debts can change abruptly, affecting the equalization payment greatly.

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

The appellant father appealed the motion judge's child support, spousal support, and equalization payment ruling, submitting that:

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.

With respect to (4) and (5), the ONCA set aside the motion judge's lump sum spousal support order, without prejudice to the mother's right to bring another motion for lump sum support, noting that the motions judge's analysis on this issue was lacking and that his approach supported the conclusion that the underlying purpose of his lump sum spousal support award was merely to convert the mother's unpaid equalization payment into lump sum spousal support following the father's bankruptcy.

The effect of this order was that the husband would be self - funding half of his equalization payment (because he was otherwise entitled to half of the proceeds of sale of the matrimonial home).

[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.

about the impact that a paying spouse's bankruptcy has on the recipient spouse's entitlement to nonetheless receive either child / spousal support, or an equalization payment as part of a separation or divorce.

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. $ 50,000.

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.

Can the Post-Bankruptcy Distinction Between Support and Equalization Payments be Circumvented?

If one separated or divorced spouse is obliged, by agreement or court order, to pay the other spouse an equalization payment, there are various enforcement mechanisms that can be brought into play if he or she does not do so.

As a matter of law, therefore, the calculation of the division of assets and resulting equalization payment must always precede any support analysis.

Moreover, the motion judge was wrong to deal with the unequal division claim at the pleadings stage, because such a determination can only be done after the usual equalization payment is calculated.

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.