“To receive an order for spousal support a spouse must first establish that he or she is entitled to spousal support. Entitlement is a threshold issue which can be established in three ways. First is the compensatory claim. In this claim the potential recipient must demonstrate that he or she has suffered economic loss as a result of roles adopted during the marriage or because the recipient conferred some economic benefit on the payor without compensation. Second is the non-compensatory claim. In this claim the recipient must establish that he or she has suffered economic hardship as a result of the marriage break down. The third way is on the basis of a contract between the parties: Bracklow v. Bracklow, 1999 CanLII 715 (SCC), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 420 at paragraphs 41, 43, 44 and 49.
“[T]he mere passage of time itself does not constitute a material change in circumstances in respect of a spousal obligation”: Hess v. Hamilton, 2018 ONSC 661 (CanLII) at para. 100. In circumstances where the original basis for entitlement was compensation, repartnering is unlikely to constitute a material change in circumstances: Walsh v. Davidson, 2016 ONSC 7318 (CanLII) at para. 19. This is because compensatory support is intended to compensate for economic loss or disadvantage caused by roles adopted during the relationship. This is a retrospective analysis: see Wegler v. Wegler, 2012 ONSC 5982 (CanLII). The focus of the analysis is on where the recipient would have been if they had entered or remained in the labour force.
Where entitlement is established on the basis of economic hardship, a repartnering is likely to constitute a material change in circumstances: Strifler v. Strifler, 2014 ONCJ 69 (CanLII) at para. 82. This is because a needs-based entitlement is intended to address needs that have arisen as a result of the breakdown of the relationship: see Wegler at para. 92.”