Child support in Canada is governed mainly by the Child Support Guidelines, which tie the basic amount to the payor's income and the number of children. In principle it is straightforward: income goes up, support goes up. In practice, disputes often arise about the past — where a payor's income rose but support did not, or where support was never properly set. These are retroactive claims, and two Supreme Court decisions shape how courts handle them.
The guiding principle
Underneath both cases is one idea: child support is the right of the child, not of the parent who receives it. A parent cannot bargain it away, and delay by the recipient does not simply erase what the child was owed. That principle pushes courts toward making sure children receive what the Guidelines would have required.
D.B.S. v. S.R.G. (2006)
D.B.S. set out the framework for retroactive child support. Rather than a rigid rule, the Court identified factors to balance, including:
- Whether there was a reasonable excuse for the recipient's delay in seeking support.
- The conduct of the payor parent — for example, whether they hid income increases or discouraged a claim.
- The circumstances and needs of the child, both past and present.
- Any hardship a retroactive award would cause the payor.
The Court also indicated that awards would often be dated back to the point of "effective notice" — roughly, when the recipient raised the issue — and generally suggested a practical outer limit of a few years, though this is not an absolute rule.
Michel v. Graydon (2020)
Michel v. Graydon reinforced and extended the principle. The Court confirmed that a retroactive child-support claim can be pursued even after the child is no longer a "child of the marriage" — that is, even after the child has grown up. It rejected the idea that the obligation quietly disappears once support ends, emphasising again that the money was the child's due. The decision also spoke to the real-world barriers, such as power imbalances, that can prevent a recipient from claiming sooner.
Practical lessons
- Payors are expected to disclose income increases; staying silent can count against them.
- Recipients should raise the issue promptly, because delay is one of the factors weighed.
- A retroactive claim is not automatically barred just because the children are older or support has ended.
For education only. Retroactive awards depend heavily on the facts, the timing, and the conduct of both parents.
This article is general information for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. For advice on your situation, book a consultation.