The court noted that Hull if allowed to relocate, would not pursue spousal support and was willing to compromise on some aspects of child support. The court acknowledged Hull’s right to waive spousal support but emphasized that child support, being the right of the child, could not be waived or negotiated away by either parent.
Kornilov brought the case to the BC Supreme Court, seeking a reduction of his child support obligation to zero on the ground of “undue hardship” under s. 10 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines. Kornilov’s claim hinged on the significant expenses associated with exercising parenting time, especially given the geographical distance between Mila’s residence in Australia and Kornilov’s location in British Columbia.
The court noted that under the Guidelines, even if a parent might suffer undue hardship as a result of unusually high expenses related to parenting time, any consequential application to reduce or eliminate child support must be denied if the support payor’s “household” nonetheless has a higher standard of living than the “household” of the other parent.
Furthermore, the court noted that hardship would be “undue” if it is “exceptional,” “excessive,” or “disproportionate” in all the circumstances. Accordingly, the court emphasized that a contextual assessment is required. The court analyzed the financial details, including travel and accommodation costs, and concluded that Kornilov’s claim of undue hardship did not meet the threshold required.
The court found that Kornilov earns much more income than Hull, who works part-time, 20 hours per week on average. The court also noted that Kornilov made no payment towards child support before a consent interim order was made at a judicial case conference.