In Peters v. MacLean, “Double dipping” was described as follows at para. 34: … where the payee spouse would receive a double benefit from assets that have already been divided between the parties. Double-dipping in the most classic sense occurs where, as in Boston, the payee spouse has received her interest in the payor’s pension and the payor is required to continue to pay spousal support based on the income he receives from the pension when he retires. In Boston at paras. 63-64, Major J. stated:
"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.