The court found significant income disparity between the parties and economic interdependency
In a recent family law case, the BC Supreme Court granted the respondent limited spousal support due to economic hardship resulting from a 21-year marriage despite rejecting the claim for compensatory support.
In Tai v Wu, 2024 BCSC 1279, the respondent argued for indefinite spousal support on a compensatory and non-compensatory basis, citing part-time work and primary childcare responsibilities during the marriage. The former spouse contended that the respondent was not entitled to compensatory support, as no career opportunities were foregone for family obligations, and any economic benefit was offset by the respondent's share of the family property accumulated during the marriage.
The court reviewed the background facts, noting that the parties, aged 46 and 47, met in Hong Kong in 1999 and moved to Canada in 2000. One party worked full-time and advanced their career, while the other worked part-time and managed childcare, with limited English proficiency and job skills restricting employment opportunities.
Most Read
The couple had two children and shared childcare responsibilities, with the respondent taking on more household duties after the former spouse's maternity leave. Despite working part-time, the respondent controlled major family expenditures and preferred saving over spending on family entertainment. In 2015, the respondent quit their job, citing unhappiness, and struggled to find consistent employment thereafter.
In 2017, after a health scare, the former spouse returned to work, and the respondent decided to stay home full-time. Their relationship deteriorated, leading to separation in October 2021. The respondent found full-time work shortly after the separation but was fired in December 2023 due to a physical altercation at work, remaining unemployed at the time of the trial.
The court examined the legal framework for spousal support under the Divorce Act, noting that it aims to relieve economic hardship resulting from marriage or its breakdown. The court found that the respondent was not entitled to compensatory support, as their career was not adversely affected by family responsibilities, and their limited job prospects were due to a lack of English proficiency and voluntary absence from the workforce.
However, the Supreme Court determined that the respondent was entitled to non-compensatory support due to the significant income disparity between the parties and the economic interdependency during their 21-year marriage. The court acknowledged that the respondent had suffered economic hardship due to the marriage breakdown.
The court awarded the respondent retroactive spousal support and ongoing support for a limited duration. The court ordered spousal support of $990 per month until June 2025, with adjustments based on income and tuition payments, and set the support duration at five years from the date of separation.
