“The proper approach to determining support for an adult child who is attending school away from home was set out by Wright J. in Coghill v. Coghill, 2006 CanLII 28734 (Ont. S.C.). It was summarized succinctly by Price J. in Liscio v. Avram, 2009 CanLII 43640 (Ont. S.C.), at para. 36:
The proper approach, in these circumstances, is the one taken by this Court in Coghill v. Coghill, at paras. 44 to 53. In that case, Justice Wright calculated the child’s expenses during the eight months the child was at university, deducted the contribution the child was able to make from summer earnings, apportioned the net expenses between the parents in proportion to their respective incomes and required them to pay their respective shares directly to the child. He then calculated the table amount of the non-residential parent’s obligation to pay child support for the four summer months, when the child was living with the residential parent, as if the child were a minor, based on the income imputed to the non-residential parent and required him to pay that amount to the residential parent. He then required the non-residential parent to pay one third of the table amount to the residential parent for the eight months when the child was at university to help defray that parent’s costs of maintaining a home for the child to return to on holidays and during the summer. [Citations omitted.]”