McMillan and McMillan (Child support)

The case of *McMillan and McMillan (Child support)* concerned an application to review a decision regarding a binding child support agreement. The parties, McMillan and McMillan, were in dispute over the interpretation of their agreement, specifically whether the periodic rate of child support payable ought to reduce once their child turned 18 years of age. The matter came before the court for review of a prior decision.

The central legal issue before the court was the proper construction of the binding child support agreement in light of the child reaching the age of majority. The court was required to determine whether the terms of the agreement stipulated a reduction in child support payments upon the child turning 18, or if the payments were intended to continue at the existing rate.

The court affirmed the decision under review, finding that the binding child support agreement did not provide for a reduction in the periodic rate of child support once the child turned 18. The court's reasoning focused on the plain language of the agreement, concluding that its terms did not support the interpretation that the payments were contingent on the child's age in the manner contended by one of the parties. The legal principle applied was the standard approach to contractual interpretation, giving effect to the clear and unambiguous terms of the binding child support agreement.