HOROBEC v TRAN, 2026 ABKB 494

The Parties consented to a child support Order that required annual financial disclosure; however, the father, the Respondent, never complied. The mother, the Applicant, applied for an Order for disclosure. The Applicant also sought an Order to appoint Cameron Brinkman, a Senior Valuation Consultant, to provide a guideline income report at the Respondent’s sole expense.

Justice McGuire acknowledged that there was no statutory jurisdiction, applicable Rule, or precedential authority to grant an Order requiring the Respondent to retain Mr. Brinkman at his own expense. Although Case Management Judges in Ontario may grant Orders requiring the engagement of an expert by or for one or more parties, Alberta has no similar rule. McGuire J. noted that Alberta has Rules 6.40-6.43 which permits the Court to appoint experts for trial, emphasizing that Rule 6.40 relates to trial evidence, not pre-trial discovery. Further, the cost of a Court-appointed expert must be shared equally by the parties.

The Court found that the Applicant did not seek an Order to appoint an expert pursuant to Rule 6.40 by requesting an Order requiring the Respondent to pay for her chosen expert. As such, Justice McGuire dismissed the Application for this Order, noting that the Applicant could retain Mr. Brinkman as an expert if she wanted to and could seek an Order for those costs before the trial Judge. McGuire J. emphasized that the Respondent was obligated to make full and complete disclosure of his financial information and that he was entitled to retain an expert of his choosing. The Court ordered full and complete financial disclosure of all information from 2008 to 2025 and directed that if the Respondent did not comply with the Order, the Applicant had leave to bring a contempt Application.