(a) the spouse is intentionally under-employed or unemployed, other than where the under-employment or unemployment is required by the needs of a child of the marriage or any child under the age of majority or by the reasonable educational or health needs of the spouse; (link)
2002: In one case income was imputed at a reasonable rate for the job the NCP was employed at but the system itself interfered with his ability to earn the expected wage. The judge was made aware of this but was inclined to impute income suggesting that the NCP didn't look for work by visiting potential employers all the while the NCP had a position available, though not at pre-2001 levels. The judge disregarded the NCPs efforts to work outside his area of expertise (in an entry-level position) as an alternate to the NCPs chosen profession (technology), even thought the system repeatedly made this work impractical or inaccessible (like unreasonable support garnishment or withdrawl of driving licence). The NCP cannot appeal the judges decision.
It's supposed to be illegal to force someone to sign a contract. They need to be willing and mentally able to do so for it to be binding. To be forced to sign something, enter into a contract, under pressure of a situation is to be under duress. It seems to me that the uninformed or the unrepresented, or even just the threatened are placed in this position on a regular basis.
My initial divorce decree was signed under the duress of not being able to see my kids because my lawyer didn't inform me that the judge, should he hear the case, would not likely hear the her claims because they were unfounded. My fear was that the judge may hear issues or concerns that would prejudice his views allowing him to take away access to my kids. Because of this fear I negotiated and though unhappy with the arrangement, signed the agreement under duress.
In another situation, the FRO gave me two options, agree to pay an outrageous amount of support each month, or lose my license. Though the lawyer for thr FRO seemed helpful and my access to a lawyer non-existant, the duress of the situation said I must agree to pay the amount, because without it I could not drive to earn a living.
Now, again, I find myself under pressure to sign a document under duress. The "DOMESTIC CONTRACT" my ex-wife and I must sign each year, establishing for the FRO how much I must pay each month, is due for an update. The update is May 1st. The information was provided to my ex-wife on March 25th, she responded yesterday (April 29th) with a clause in the contract that will ensure failure and arrears based on my current earnings. The duress is that if I don't submit this contract, I will be faced with an increase to my CS amount 75% higher than I should be paying. If I signe the contract and would have 1 year to increase my income over 78% before the imputed income amount would return as a seemingly permanent threat.
I will not sign the contract under duress. I have re-written the contract to exclude this clause and will re-submit to my ex-wife. I fully expect the FRO to begin May with an amount based on an imputed income of $75000 and I will not pay this amount because it is not an amount agreed to or arrived at in a fair or reasonable manner. Perhaps this is contempt of court, perhaps the court should be held in contempt of fairness. I will not sign an agreement that sets me up for failure.