Is a child who is an elite athlete with professional-level prospects entitled to s. 7(1) of the BCSC's Child Support Guidelines entitled to be paid for extracurricular activities?

Children who are elite athletes with professional-level prospects may benefit from extracurricular activities “at as high a level the parties’ combined means and circumstances is reasonably capable of supporting”: B.E.M. at para. 115. However, a child’s extraordinary aptitude does not render reasonable an expense that is otherwise outside of the parties’ financial means: Richter v. Richter, 2010 BCSC 1578 at paras. 7-11 [Richter]. Even if a child shows great promise, s. 7 payments are confined to and “capped” at what is reasonable. Reasonableness is measured against the combined financial means of the parents (and where appropriate, the child) as well as the family’s spending patterns prior to separation: Clarke v. Clarke, 2014 BCSC 824 at para. 52.

In Baum v. Baum, 2000 BCSC 1835, the court concluded that the word “means”, found in s. 7(1) of the Guidelines, should be interpreted broadly to include not just the income of the spouse, but other sources of revenue available, including overall family income.

Consultation is a factor informing the reasonableness of extraordinary expenses. For extracurricular activities, one parent cannot make decisions concerning a child that will have unreasonable impacts on the other parent, including the support that parent may have to pay: Richter at para. 9. Some sacrifices may be unreasonable in light of the parties’ means. Consultation or lack thereof is not on its own determinative of proper apportionment of extraordinary expenses, but it is one of many factors the judge may take into account when exercising discretion: Delichte v. Rogers, 2013 MBCA 106 at para. 44 [Delichte].