The Divorce Act Changes Explained: Part II

Appendix C

Fig. 1 provides four new definitions introduced by former Bill C-78 that apply to the inter-jurisdictional support process of the Divorce Act, and Fig. 2 provides a sketch of conversion applications under former Bill C-78

Fig. 1 Definitions specific to the Inter-jurisdictional support process: former Bill C-78

Competent authority

“Means a court that has the authority to make an order or another entity that has the authority to make a decision with respect to support under the Divorce Act.”

A “competent authority” could either be a court authorized to make a support order under the Divorce Act or an entity, such as a provincial child support service, authorized to make a decision regarding support under the Act.

Designated authority

“Means a person or entity that is designated by a province or territory to exercise the powers or perform the duties and functions set out in sections 18.1 to 19.1 within the province or territory.”

Every Canadian province and territory has an office responsible for sending and receiving applications between jurisdictions. These offices are the “designated authorities”. Depending on the jurisdiction, the designated authority may be located:

  1. within the provincial or territorial maintenance enforcement program,
  2. a separate government office or
  3. the court.

Designated jurisdiction

“Means a jurisdiction outside Canada – whether a country or a political subdivision of a country – that is designated under an Act that relates to the reciprocal enforcement of orders relating to support, of the province or territory in which either of former spouses resides.”

Responsible authority

“Means a person or entity that, in a designated jurisdiction, performs functions that are similar to those performed by the designated authority under subsection 19(4).”

These authorities are responsible for performing administrative functions, such as sending and receiving applications between jurisdictions and a Canadian province or territory. They play a similar role to designated authorities in Canada.

Fig. 2 Conversion Applications: former Bill C-78 – Manitoba example

Fig. 2 Conversion Applications: former Bill C-78 – Manitoba example
Fig. 2 Conversion Applications: former Bill C-78 – Manitoba example - Text version

This flow chart shows the process for conversion applications under former Bill C-78 using a Manitoba example.

A Manitoba Applicant files an application to vary with the Court of King’s Bench of Manitoba and serves a Respondent in another province or territory. The Application can either seek to vary support only or seek to vary support and parenting (custody/access).

Application seeks to vary support only

When an application seeks to vary support only, there are two options:

  1. Respondent requests conversion within 40 days
    • Conversion is automatic upon request. Court must send application documents to Manitoba designated authority (Family Law Section)
    • Manitoba designated authority sends the application to designated authority in Respondent’s province as if it was an ISO-like application under ss. 18.1(3) Divorce Act
  2. Respondent does not request conversion AND does not file a Notice of Opposition to vary
    • Manitoba court must hear & determine the variation application if it is satisfied that it has sufficient evidence
      • Before the MB court hears and determines the variation application, it must consider whether there is an order assignee (in Canada) and whether the order assignee received notice of the application and did not request conversion.
    • If not satisfied of sufficient evidence, Manitoba court may direct that the application be considered as an application under ss. 18.1(3) Divorce Act
    • Manitoba designated authority sends the application to designated authority in Respondent’s province as if it was an ISO-like application under ss. 18.1(3) Divorce Act

Application seeks to vary support and parenting (custody/access)

  • Respondent requests conversion of support variation aspect within 40 days
    • The court must consider whether it is appropriate to direct that the support aspect of the variation application be considered as an application under ss. 18.1(3) Divorce Act
    • If appropriate, Manitoba court may direct that the application be considered as an application under ss. 18.1(3) Divorce Act
    • Manitoba designated authority sends the application to designated authority in Respondent’s province as if it was an ISO-like application under ss. 18.1(3) Divorce Act