Important Family Law Decisions for Albertans

At Concise Law Alberta, we understand how critical past legal decisions are in shaping family law in our province. Below is a summary of 10 important family law cases in Alberta that have influenced issues such as child custody, spousal support, and the division of assets.

1. Michel v. Graydon, 2020 SCC 24

Key Issue: Retroactive child support

Summary: The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that courts have broad discretion to award retroactive child support, even after a child has reached adulthood. The case involved a father who had underpaid child support due to non-disclosure of his increased income. The Court emphasized that child support is the right of the child, not the recipient parent, and that retroactive adjustments are necessary when a parent has failed to meet their legal obligations. This decision reinforces that parents cannot avoid financial responsibility through delay or lack of transparency.

2. Colucci v. Colucci, 2021 SCC 24

Key Issue: Reduction of child support arrears

Summary: In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that a parent seeking a reduction of past-due child support must provide full and complete financial disclosure and demonstrate a genuine inability to pay. The father in this case had accumulated significant child support arrears and later sought to reduce them, claiming financial hardship. The Court ruled that reductions are only granted in cases where the paying parent can prove a material change in circumstances and has made reasonable efforts to fulfill their obligations. This case reinforced the importance of disclosure and accountability in child support matters.

3. Hickey v. Hickey, 1999 SCC 30

Key Issue: Spousal support variation

Summary: The Supreme Court in this case emphasized that courts should be cautious when altering spousal support orders unless there is a material change in circumstances. The husband in the case sought a reduction in spousal support payments due to changes in his financial situation. The Court held that appellate courts should defer to trial judges' discretion in spousal support matters, as they are in the best position to assess the evidence. The decision reinforced that spousal support obligations should be adjusted only when there is clear justification based on significant changes in income or needs.

4. Richardson v. Richardson, 2013 ABCA 401

Key Issue: Mobility rights and child relocation

Summary: This case confirmed that a parent seeking to relocate with a child must prove that the move is in the child’s best interests, not just their own. The mother in this case wanted to relocate to another province with her child, but the father objected. The Alberta Court of Appeal ruled that courts must weigh factors such as the impact on the child’s relationship with both parents, educational opportunities, and the child’s overall well-being. The decision reinforced that parental mobility rights are secondary to the best interests of the child.

5. DBS v. SRG, 2006 SCC 37

Key Issue: Retroactive child support

Summary: This landmark case clarified that retroactive child support should be based on fairness and the conduct of both parents. The Court outlined key factors, including the reason for the delay in seeking child support, whether the paying parent engaged in blameworthy conduct, and the hardship that retroactive payments might cause. The ruling discouraged long delays in making claims while also emphasizing the importance of ensuring that children receive the financial support they are entitled to.

6. Barendregt v. Grebliunas, 2022 SCC 22

Key Issue: Mobility and relocation disputes

Summary: The Supreme Court ruled that in relocation disputes, courts must focus primarily on the child’s best interests, rather than a parent’s right to move. The mother in this case wanted to relocate to another province with her children, arguing that it would provide better financial and emotional stability. The father objected, citing concerns over reduced access to his children. The Court ruled that the relocation would not be in the children’s best interests, as it would negatively impact their relationship with their father. This decision reinforced the importance of maintaining meaningful parental relationships in relocation cases.

7. Hughes v. Hughes, 2019 ABCA 300

Key Issue: Division of family property

Summary: The Alberta Court of Appeal ruled that hidden assets or misrepresentation in divorce proceedings can lead to the court reopening the division of assets. The husband in this case had failed to disclose significant financial information during the divorce, leading to an unfair distribution of property. The Court ruled that if a party is found to have concealed assets or misrepresented their financial situation, courts have the discretion to revisit the division of property. This decision underscores the necessity of full and honest disclosure in family law proceedings.

8. J.E.S.D. v. Y.E.P., 2022 ABCA 97

Key Issue: Parental alienation

Summary: This case highlighted the courts’ willingness to change custody arrangements when one parent engages in severe parental alienation. The father in this case alleged that the mother had deliberately alienated the children from him, making them fearful and unwilling to visit. The Alberta Court of Appeal upheld a lower court ruling that transferred custody to the father, emphasizing that alienation harms a child’s well-being and development. The case reinforced that courts will intervene when a parent undermines the child’s relationship with the other parent.

9. K.L.W. v. R.P.W., 2021 ABCA 27

Key Issue: Common-law property rights

Summary: The Alberta Court of Appeal ruled that unmarried partners may have a right to property division, depending on their financial contributions. The claimant in this case argued that she was entitled to a share of her partner’s property despite not being legally married. The Court found that contributions to the property, either financially or through labour, could give rise to a constructive trust. This decision clarified that long-term common-law partners may have legal claims to shared assets, even without formal marriage.

10. AAD v. AAG, 2022 ABCA 5

Key Issue: Best interests of the child

Summary: The Alberta Court of Appeal reaffirmed that the best interests of the child standard is paramount in custody and access disputes. In this case, both parents sought sole custody, each claiming the other was unfit. The Court carefully considered factors such as the stability of each parent’s home, the child’s attachment to each parent, and any history of abuse or neglect. The ruling emphasized that parental rights must always yield to the child’s well-being, reinforcing the importance of a child-first approach in custody disputes.

These cases reflect some of the most significant family law decisions in Alberta. If you need legal guidance regarding any of these issues, contact Concise Law Alberta today.

“This information is for educational purposes only, and is not legal advice.”