Dearden v. Clifford: BC Court Cancels Prison Child Support Arrears

In Dearden v. Clifford (2025 BCSC 1826), Justice MacDonald adopted the analytical approach set out in Colucci v. Colucci (2021 SCC 24) and partially granted the father’s request to retroactively adjust—or eliminate—child support arrears dating back to 2013, including the period during which he was imprisoned.

Before the parties separated in 2010, the father worked as a veterinarian. He stopped paying child support in 2013, prompting the mother to seek enforcement through the Family Maintenance Enforcement Program. In 2017, following legal disputes with employees and clients, he lost his veterinary licence. That same year he was convicted on charges of arson, mischief and assault, and remained in custody until 2020. Upon his release, he moved onto his elderly father’s farm, helped with daily operations and reported zero income. When his father died in 2024, the father inherited half the farm through a Henson trust, which provides him with a fixed monthly allowance rather than direct ownership proceeds.

MacDonald J held that the period of incarceration constituted a material change in circumstances warranting a retroactive variation of support obligations. Although the father did not formally notify the mother, the judge found that she was undoubtedly aware of his imprisonment, given that it stemmed from offences committed against her and her relatives—constituting sufficiently “clear communication” of the changed circumstances. As a result, all support arrears accruing during his time in prison were cancelled.

By contrast, the judge declined to forgive arrears accumulated after 2020. The court was not satisfied that the father truly earned no income and noted evidence suggesting he was concealing earnings. Furthermore, even if he chose to live on the farm and forgo paid work, that voluntary decision could not absolve him of support obligations. His loss of professional licensure, resulting from his own misconduct, did not excuse a complete inability to earn. Justice MacDonald therefore imputed annual income of $80,000 for the post-release period and left those arrears in place.

Previous
Previous

Schmidt v Schmidt 2025 ABKB 626: Special Dietary Requirements Not a Section 7 Expense

Next
Next

Volunteering for a Family Business = Imputed Income Under Child Support Guidelines