S.A.M. v. J.A.M, 2017 BCSC 638

In S.A.M. v. J.A.M, 2017 BCSC 638, Daylyn J. Miller acted for the Respondent Husband in a three-day hearing respecting ongoing spousal support. The Respondent Husband sought a decrease in spousal support on the basis that the Claimant Wife had since completed her training as a Special Education Assistant and was now employed. The Claimant Wife sought an increase in spousal support on the basis that the Respondent Husband’s income had significantly increased.

The Honourable Justice Bernard found in favour of the Respondent Husband, ordering that his spousal support payments were to be reduced, and allowing him the ability to offset loan payments against any spousal support owing. The Claimant Wife’s request for an increase in spousal support was denied, and her financial obligations, including contributing to the support of the husband’s child, were upheld.

Justice Bernard also granted the Respondent Husband’s application for a non-removal order respecting the parties’ child.

Ms. Miller was also successful in securing a cost award for the Respondent Husband due to his success at the hearing.