The applicant’s argument that the spending pattern of the parties while together would support a contribution by both parties to the educational expenses of the children was well founded. Where his argument foundered entirely was with respect to the test that the expense has to be reasonable in relation to the means of the spouses. To quote Gillese J.A. in Lewi v. Lewi: The inquiry under s. 7(1) is focused on the special expense – whether it is necessary and reasonable in light of the means of the child and the parents and the spending pattern of the family while intact. Section 7(2) deals with the amount that each parent is to contribute to that expense by stipulating that, after deducting the child’s contribution, the expense is to be shared by the parents in proportion to their “respective incomes”. It can be seen that just as the amount of child support ordered pursuant to s. 3 depends on the payor's income, the payor’s income is central to the question of the amount of additional child support ordered under s. 7.[9]
"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.