income for 2013 plus the $57,000 imputed to the husband by the
 The wife contends that, under the terms of the separation
agreement, the husband was obliged to continue supporting the
child until the child obtained one post-secondary degree. In
the alternative, she argues that, because the child remained
dependent on the wife, the motion judge erred in finding that
the child no longer qualified as a child of the marriage under the
 I would not accept these submissions.
 The relevant portions of para. 12 of the separation
agreement read as follows:
12. . . . The parties agree that the Husband’s obligation to pay child support
to the Wife shall continue until one of the following occurs with respect to
any of the Children:
. . . . .
b. the Child becomes 18 years of age and ceases to be in full-time
attendance (except for school vacations) at an educational institution;
c. the Child obtains one post-secondary educational degree or diploma
or turns twenty-three years of age, whichever occurs first. In the
event that the Child turns 23 years of age and has not yet completed her undergraduate degree or diploma, then the child support shall continue until the end of that year, provided that the
Child is carrying a full course load;
. . . . .
f. the Child dies; or
g. the Child ceases to be a “child of the marriage” as defined in the
Divorce Act or the Guidelines.
 The wife asserts that the terms of this provision should
be interpreted broadly to benefit the parties’ children. As para.
12(c) does not stipulate that a child is required to be in
full-time attendance at an educational institution, she maintains that the husband was not entitled to terminate support
for the youngest child so long as the child was pursuing a post-secondary degree (including a certificate) and had not yet
reached the age of 23.
 I disagree. Each of the sub-paragraphs in para. 12 is a
triggering event that stipulates conditions under which the
husband can terminate child support. The sub-paragraphs do
not require the husband to continue paying child support where
one of the sub-paragraphs has been triggered just because all
of the conditions of another sub-paragraph have not been