Does a post-separation disparity in income between the payor and payor spouse need to be a basis for non-compensatory spousal support?

However, post-separation disparity in income is not, on its own, a basis for non-compensatory spousal support, even where a payor spouse does have an ability to pay: Lee v. Lee, 2014 BCCA 383 at paras. 61 and 65.

On an application for interim spousal support, the governing criteria are qualified by other considerations that relate to the appropriateness of granting relief in advance of a full trial on the merits: Robles v. Kuhn, 2009 BCSC 1163 [Robles] at para. 12. For present purposes, the relevant additional considerations, as listed at para. 12 of Robles, are these: i. On interim support applications, the court should not embark on an in-depth analysis of the parties’ circumstances, which is better left to trial. The court achieves “rough justice” at best. ii. Interim support should only be ordered where it can be said a prima facie case for entitlement has been made out. iii. Where there is a need to resolve contested issues of fact, especially those connected with a threshold issue, such as entitlement, it becomes less advisable to order interim support.