An example of the type of problem that could arise if the narrow view of jurisdiction were accepted can be found in the circumstances giving rise to the judgment in George v. Gayed, 2014 ONSC 5360. Here, after a final order of child support of indefinite duration was made, the father cut off communication with the children and their mother and disappeared for over 13 years. The mother incurred significant expenses to support the children’s post-secondary education, and the children experienced financial hardship (including owing substantial loans) due to the lack of support from their father. The father came “out of hiding” (in the trial judge’s words) and brought a motion to terminate child support retroactively. The mother brought a cross-motion seeking retroactive adjustment to child support and for contribution to post-secondary costs. At the time of the application, the two children of the marriage were 25 and 28 years of age, and were 27 and 30 years old at the time of the hearing.
"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.alexsei.com.