Hello, I was just wondering if someone may solve this practice problem fully? I dont quite understand it. If you could show me the step by step with the solution at the end of the question(s) it would really help me understand the concept and how you reached the final result. Thank you in advance.

I have added textbook readings on family law if it helps

*NOTE THIS IS THE FULL QUESTION THERE IS NO OTHER DATA FOR THIS QUESTION*

CHAPTER 5: FAMILY LAW ENDING A RELATIONSHIP As in previous sections, the rules governing the end of a relationship may depend on whether the couple is married or not. Most of what follows concerns termina- tion of a spousal relationship by separation and divorce rather than death. Separation The first step in ending a relationship is for the couple to stop living together. A separation agreement is the contract in which they determine how this happens with respect to property division, support of each other and dependent children, custody of children, right to visits with children, possession of the matri- monial home, and, less frequently, other matters like maintenance of life insurance or specific payments contingent on unforeseen future needs. A separation agreement is also a domestic contract, and is bound by the same rules as marriage and cohabitation agreements except that child custody may form part of the agreement. You do not need to be married to create a separation agreement, but there is one crucial difference between married and unmarried couples. The provisions of the Family Law Act do not apply with respect to division of property and so an unmarried spouse cannot enforce any division of property under the law. The Divorce Act does not cover division of property, though it can deal with any other aspect of the dissolution of a marriage. One of the two most important and often contentious parts of the process of creating a separation agreement is the financial disclosure by both parties. Each province has its own set of forms. They ask for a great deal of detail, but the fundamental requirement is a balance sheet including considerable informa- tion about major assets, an income statement, and a budget for each individual. Chapter 4 of this text covers most of what you need to know to do this, though there are specific details that must follow the provincial laws precisely. Failure to meet the disclosure requirement can invalidate a separation agreement and even required. lead to serious penalties. Kronby provides the example of the Ontario forms Custody and access to children is the other most contentious issue in separat tions. One family law expert advised us that if a couple can resolve this issue, everything else is relatively easy. Since this is a personal finance textbook, we will happily skip this topic except for the financial issues involved, to be discussed in a later section. Support obligations for children are not quite as contentious as they once were, due to guidelines now in place. We discuss all forms of support and division of property in separate sections. Malcolm Kronby, Canadian Family Law, 8th ed. (Toronto: Stoddart, 2001), pp. 168-82.WAJ KIMAT SUPPORT Separation agreements require a large quantity of other details, too numerous to relate here. Michael Cochrane provides an example of the sort of provisions that a separation agreement may include. Divorce Fiction creates the most dramatic situations out of divorce laws, which some o blid jurisdictions make it very difficult to achieve even today. In 1986 the federal Divorce Act set three grounds for divorce: 1. Intentional separation for one year because of marital difficulties. 2. Adultery. 3. Husband or wife subjects the other to intolerable physical or mental cruelty. Most divorces are granted on the basis of a one-year separation. A divorce starts with a petition by one party to a court asking that the marriage be dissolved. If the respondent agrees with the petitioner and does not contest the divorce, it is granted quickly and easily, and the lawyers don't get too rich. In fact, the parties need not attend the actual court hearing of the petition except in Newfoundland and Quebec (this latter only if there are dependent children of the marriage). Con- tested divorces are not common, and when they do occur can cost the couple a lot of money in legal fees. The problems in divorce arise when the couple has not satisfactorily worked out the details of living apart through a separation agreement. The Divorce Act gives the court no authority over division of property, but it can change or set aside provisions in a separation agreement regarding other matters, particularly the support of dependent children. If a court decides that the support provisions are not in the best interests of the children, it may change them. onT bobson SUPPORT stierlow RhoneD soout to anemiaaged Dependent Children pilusise atrueme outipone gisingo conilebing Every parent has an obligation to provide support for unmarried dependent children who are under the age of 18 or who are in full-time attendance at an educational institution, according to need. This obligation does not extend to a child at least 16 years of age who is no longer under parental control. Children with disabilities may require support for their lifetime, and a court can order this. Separation agreements often contain clauses that require one parent to continue to provide support for children who are older than 18 but continue to live at home Michael Cochrane, Surviving Your Divorce, 3rd ed. (Etobicoke: John Wiley, 2002), pp. 268-87.CHAPTER 5: FAMILY LAW For income tax purposes, a child who is supporting a dependent adult may deduct some of the expenses. Any gift made by a child to a parent to help suppos the parent is not taxable or tax-deductible. DIVISION OF PROPERTY Upon breakdown of a marriage, the actual ownership of any property in the max fiage is largely irrelevant, because a division is required and applies to all property unless explicitly excluded. Division of property occurs only through domestic con tracts and the FLAs. The Divorce Act contains no rules regarding such division though the effect of it may be considered regarding support orders. Only married couples can claim division of property under the rules of the FLAs. Unmarried couples whom we would consider to be spousal couples for financial planning pur. poses, and who are considered equivalent to married under the Income Tax Act. have no rights under the FLAs. More about that later, but for now we are discuss ing property division upon breakdown of marriages only. The way we go about property division is to value all of the property that each party owns or that is owned jointly. Once again, this is a balance sheet exercise as in Chapter 4, and the valuation is market value minus costs of realiza- tion (including selling costs and taxes) and minus debts. Everything must be put on the table initially. Leaving out any property at this point can invalidate a separation agreement. Then, subject to a variety of rules, the value of the property that was acquired during the marriage is divided between the two spouses. The ownership of property itself need not be transferred. All that is required is payment the division. of an amount of money or transfer of property that meets the requirements of Under the FLAs, in general, the principle is that the property acquired during the marriage is to be divided "fairly". The initial presumption is that a fair division is an equal division, barring some special circumstances. In some provinces, unequal division is allowed only when not to do so would be grossly unfair or unconsciona ble. In others, unequal division is allowed whenever the result would otherwise be merely unfair. For example, suppose one spouse built a successful business and raised the children, while the other spouse spent the entire marriage hanging out in cafes and bars. It would seem unfair under any rules to give the barfly any significant share of the business the other spouse created in the event of a marriage breakdown. Now suppose that we replace the non-working spouse in this example with a spouse who contributed little help in housekeeping or raising the children, but did work throughout the marriage and contributed to the financial costs of maintaining the household, though to a lesser degree. Should the spouse who created the business keep the entire value of it in a marriage breakdown? It seem unfair. seems unlikely that an equal division could be called unconscionable, but it would 116DIVISION OF PROPERTY Leaving aside the difficult judgments about fairness, there are some general rules that determine which property (or its value, more strictly speaking) is excluded from the division of property. You must not rely literally on this list because the rules do vary materially between the provinces, and this is a particular area where legal advice is always required. The general exclusions are as follows. 1. Property excluded explicitly in a marriage contract. 2. Property owned by one spouse in advance of the marriage. 3. A gift, inheritance, or proceeds of a court award or settlement for damages suffered personally. 4. Personal items like clothing and sporting goods. 5. Proceeds from a life insurance policy. ingenues s ders Phuour 6. Family heirlooms and antiques. 7. Property acquired after the date of separation, hung of to nubbibetul er You are now in a position to offer some more advice to Laura about the financial effects of a decision to end her marriage to Eustace. She is entitled to an equal share of the property accumulated during the marriage. Certain assets may be excluded from the division, but since their marriage is of such long duration, it seems almost certain that there will be substantial division owing to her. You may also realize that it will be a significant problem for Eustace if most of the value of the family assets is tied up in the business because paying her a fair share may require sale of the business.no mostg The Matrimonial Home The matrimonial home is a special asset, particularly if there are children of the relationship who will continue to live with one parent. All provinces have rules that prevent either spouse from selling the matrimonial home or taking a mortgage on it without the permission of the other spouse. If there are no children, then couples often agree to sell the home and the net proceeds become part of the property to be divided. They may also agree to count the home as part of the division at market value without selling it. If there are children, the usual arrangement is that the spouse with custody, or with whom the children spend more time in the case of joint custody, continues to occupy the house and the couple retains ownership as joint tenants of the home for some period of time. After that period of time the property is sold and the value divided as already agreed. If one spouse brought a house into the marriage and the couple subsequently lives in it on a full-time basis, it becomes the matrimonial home. It is then subject to equal division of property. If the spouse who owns the home coming into the marriage wishes to protect that interest like any other property brought into the marriage, the couple must create and sign a valid marriage contract specifying that.Spouse The old term of alimony does not exist except for decisions made prior to the current Family Law Acts and the Divorce Act, and carried forward as sup- port orders. Alimony under the old laws was an allowance a man paid to his for- mer wife for her living costs, but he had to pay it only if he had been guilty of adultery, cruelty, or desertion. The modern concept of spousal support means that in the event of a marriage breakdown, each spouse has an obligation to assist the other spouse financially to the extent that support is needed and can be afforded. g mol Hiw whogong odd mon a Unfortunately, these are very broad provisions, and court decisions vary widely both within and across jurisdictions. Spousal support can be ordered under both the Divorce Act and the provincial FLAs, which makes it even more difficult to lay down specific principles. The Divorce Act principles do generally apply throughout the field, including to unmarried spouses under the FLAs, however. The Divorce Act recognizes four objectives of spousal support: momvolume a bagoga andT 113CHAPTER 5: FAMILY LAW (a) recognize any economic advantages or disadvantages to the spouses arising from the marriage or its breakdown; (b) apportion between the spouses any financial consequences arising from the care of any child of the marriage over and above any obligation for the support of any child of the marriage; (c) relieve any economic hardship of the spouses arising from the breakdown of the marriage; and (d) in so far as practicable, promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time. (Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.), s. 15.2(6)) While this short section alone could provide the material for many books we will make just a few comments. Most spousal support awards go to wives. though there are an increasing number flowing from wives to husbands. Under the FLAs, the couple need not be married, but they cannot use the Divorce Act to affect any decision reached under the FLA, nor any separation agreement. A com- mon observation is that female spouses who take custody of children typically end up poorer than the fathers, because of the lost opportunities for advancement in the work place. The spousal support provisions are an attempt to correct that, but it is quite difficult to achieve. At the same time, spouses have an obligation to provide for themselves, and support orders or agreements should contain provisions to encourage them to retrain or otherwise make themselves employable in the long the work force. run. This is easier to achieve the younger the spouse and shorter the time out of Michael Cochrane ventures into this minefield with some general principles, which we summarize here: . Spouse's ability to pay. A spouse should not expect to maintain the same stan- dard of living as before if the payer would be impoverished. . A spouse should not be required to take any possible job in order to support his or her own needs. The job should be reasonable considering the skills and ability of the recipient spouse. . Spousal support is not intended to equalize the incomes of the two spouses . The need for spousal support should be determined after division of property The income the spouse can generate from the property will form part of the calculation of how much spousal support is required, if any. . The prudent investment of the assets from division of property will be include in the calculations. The spouse is not required to be an expert investor, but muy use the assets to reduce dependency. . The spouse's employment qualifications will be considered. 114WONIN SUPPORT Spousal support may be denied where both spouses worked throughout the marriage and after breakdown and the sale of the matrimonial home generates additional funds for investment, even if the marriage was lengthy. Rogerson and Thompson have developed a set of guidelines for spousal sup- port that are somewhat similar to those for child support. The spousal support guidelines are not enshrined in law, however, and are to provide guidance, not an entitlement." Spousal support paid according to a legally binding agreement (which usu- ally means a court has approved the agreement) is taxable in the hands of the recipient and tax-deductible for the payer. Since it is common that the payer is in the higher tax bracket, the tax-efficient method is a regular support payment rather than a lump-sum settlement. Unfortunately, the record of unpaid support is quite extensive and the ability or even willingness of courts and governments to enforce it quite weak. As a result, an inefficient lump-sum payment may be the safest way for a spouse to secure his or her entitlement. It is not completely tax- inefficient, since the income earned on the lump sum is taxed at the lower marginal rate. Now you can give Laura part of the advice she needs in her troubled relation- ship with Eustace. First, she is going to need to consult a lawyer. If she decides to leave Eustace to live on her own, he will have a support obligation towards her. Alimony and the law attached to it no longer exist or apply to them. She is already 57 and has never worked outside the home, so the prospect of her being able to earn her own living now is slight. Eustace has a successful business, and so his ability to pay support is not in question. You have probably realized by now that there is also an issue about the assets in the marriage, but let's leave that until we discuss division of property. agingon long ahead 32. Every child who is not a minor has an obligation to provide support, in accordance with need, for his or her parent who has cared for or pro- vided support for the child, to the extent that the child is capable of doing so. (Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F-3)to sudanhunting argus for baby boomers, you could call this the family law sandwich! gig , Michael Cochrane, Surviving Your Divorce, 3rd ed. (Etobicoke: John Wiley, 2002), pp. 129-30, Carol Rogerson and" and Rollie Thompson, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, Presented to Family, Children and Youth Section, Department of Justice Canada, July 2008. Available online. www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fcy-fea/spo-epo/g-ld/spag/pdf/SSAG_eng.pdf>. 115