“The starting point is that child support does not belong to the primary residence parent; it is the right and entitlement of the child as it enriches the household in which the child lives in. For example, the Supreme Court of Canada has long confirmed and on several occasions that child support is the right of the child and not the parent: see Richardson v. Richardson, 1987 CanLII 58 (SCC), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 857 at para. 13. Although Richardson was decided more than 30 years ago, it remains good law today. It was cited with approval in the seminal case of S. (D.B.) v. G. (S.R.),, 2006 SCC 37 by Basterache J. who, writing for the majority, stated [at para. 38]:
These core principles animate the support obligations that parents have towards their children. They include: child support is the right of the child; the right to support survives the breakdown of a child’s parents’ marriage; child support should, as much as possible, provide children with the same standard of living they enjoyed when their parents were together; and finally, the specific amounts of child support owed will vary based upon the income of the payor parent.
Moreover, ensuring payment of the proper amount of child support is seen as the responsibility of both parents and not as an entitlement to either: at para. 60, Basterache stated that:
No child support analysis should ever lose sight of the fact that support is the right of the child: Richardson, at p. 869. Where one or both parents fail to vigilantly monitor child support payment amounts, the child should not be left to suffer without a remedy.
Therefore, if the child is a “child of the marriage” within the meaning of the Divorce Act, child support is not seen as a benefit to the recipient parent. The recipient, in seeking child support, is effectively acting on behalf of the child to enforce the child’s rights to support. Wilson J. confirmed at para. 14 in Richardson that “the fact that child support will indirectly benefit the spouse cannot decrease the quantum awarded to the child.” Irrespective of his poor conduct, C.M.V. is still responsible to collect and obtain for R.E. the child support that he is entitled to under the Divorce Act and the CSGs. No one else is.”