Skip to main content

In This Volume

  • 28 (1) Despite any other Act, a maintenance order, whether filed with the director or not, takes priority over any other unsecured judgment debt of the debtor regardless of when an enforcement process is issued or served.
  • (2) The priority under subsection (1) does not apply to arrears of maintenance owing under a maintenance order that were owing more than one year before the date on which the creditor initiated the current proceedings to enforce the maintenance order.
  • (3) A maintenance order ranks equally with another maintenance order regardless of when an enforcement process is issued or served.
  • (4) Payments received by the director on behalf of a creditor are not attachable under any other Act.

1988-3-25.

CASE LAW

The sum of $28,276 was paid into court as a result of the sale of the respondent’s lands under enforcement proceedings brought by the petitioner under the Court Order Enforcement Act. At the time of the sale, six judgments were registered against the title to the property, including one in favour of the petitioner. Ordinarily, in proceedings such as this, money realized from a sale of the judgment debtor’s property is shared rateably among the creditors by virtue of the operation of ss. 95 and 111 of the Court Order Enforcement Act. However, under s. 26(5) of the Family Maintenance Enforcement Act, ss. 95 and 111 of the Court Order Enforcement Act do not apply to maintenance orders registered in the land title office. Section 28 of the Family Maintenance Enforcement Act gives maintenance orders priority over other unsecured judgments. Accordingly, the maintenance order of the petitioner took priority over other judgment debts. The court ordered that any monies remaining after payment of the maintenance order in full were to be distributed rateably among the other creditors (British Columbia (Director of Maintenance Enforcement) v. Leontowicz, 1999 CanLII 5705 (BC SC) (Master)).