In Parker v. Vik, 2006 BCSC 1193, the payor husband’s present and future income was uncertain. Notwithstanding that, Justice Satanove imputed an amount for the husband’s income and ordered permanent spousal support for an indefinite period, stating at para. 22: In keeping with Leskun v. Leskun, the trial court should try to fix permanent maintenance wherever possible, subject only to a change of circumstances. The mechanism of constant review of spousal support in family cases under s. 15.2 of the Divorce Act is expensive and leads to uncertainty and a lack of finality.
"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.