In what circumstances will a court order lump sum child support?

Recently, in Devathasan v. Devathasan, 2019 BCSC 661, Justice Gomery found special circumstances and ordered lump sum child support. The special circumstances included the payor father’s past refusal to make support payments and the difficulty in enforcing a periodic order in Singapore.

I agree that lump sum child support orders should be reserved for cases with special circumstances. Relevant circumstances will include those set out in Komori and Zhang. In addition, a lump sum award should not be made where the payor does not have the ability to make the lump sum payment without undermining his or her future self-sufficiency: Davis v. Crawford, 2011 ONCA 294 at para. 63.

The judge’s decision to order periodic rather than lump sum child support is entitled to considerable deference: Hickey at para. 11; Parrett v. Parrett, 2016 BCCA 151 at para. 15. Nevertheless, I would allow the respondent’s appeal. There are two reasons for doing so. First, although the judge recognized that the appellant had not complied with court orders and had a history of non-disclosure, he was of the view that he could not find that the appellant was in default of support payments given that they had been paid, as ordered, out of the Sowden proceeds. I am of the view that the judge erred in principle in reaching that conclusion. The fact that the Sowden proceeds were used to fund the support payments meant that the appellant was not in arrears at the time of trial, but those funds are now gone. The evidence at trial does not support a conclusion that the appellant is likely to voluntarily make support payments in the future. Indeed, he has continued on appeal to pursue the same arguments he made at trial about his level of income and inability to work.