The consent order entered into between the parties on November 23, 2001 was not appealed. According to Willick v. Willick, 1994 CanLII 28 (SCC), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 670, therefore, it must be presumed to be correct. It is important to emphasize, however, that the fact that a proposed consent order concerning child support is based on a prior written agreement between the parties with the benefit of legal advice does not require the court to give effect to its terms. It does not obviate the duty of a chambers judge to inquire into a proposed order, such as that here, which dismisses a claim for child support despite the apparent means of both parties. In rare instances, there may be a justification for such an order (for example, where the payor's income is below the minimum Guidelines income), but no such justification is apparent here.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.