A lump sum payment is subject to the same restriction as a periodic payment. Mr. Justice Martland in Van Zyderveld v. Van Zyderveld 1976 CanLII 169 (SCC), [1976] 4 W.W.R. at 734, after referring to Nash v. Nash 1974 CanLII 22 (SCC), [1975] 2 S.C.R. 507, said at p. 739: “That case decided that s. 11(1) of the Divorce Act did not permit an order for payment of periodic sums and, concurrently, an order to provide security for their payment, without directing that the periodic payments be paid out of the security. Similarily, on the reasoning of that case, it would appear to me that the court cannot order payment of a lump sum and also direct the provision of security for its payment.”
"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.