Moreover, he claims that the amount he has offered to pay amounts to more than two times what the applicant presently claims she now needs to live on, that the period of time of the adjournment is only three months, and thus that there is no pressing need to determine that an amount of child support be payable now, and retroactively, in the amount claimed by counsel for the applicant. Further, he notes that at least in the R v. R. case, the support amount was awarded after trial with cross-examination on all the evidence and thus in an equivalent manner conceptually, such an amount should not be awarded here on an adjournment until the questioning has taken place.
"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.