Bastarache v Bastarache, (2012) 387 N.B.R.(2d) 152 (FD)

• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Judge: Walsh, J.
• Neutral Citation: 2012 NBQB 75
• Date: 07 March 2012
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)

Bastarache v. Bastarache (2012), 387 N.B.R.(2d) 152 (FD);

    387 R.N.-B.(2e) 152; 1001 A.P.R. 152

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2012] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.026

Renvoi temp.: [2012] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.026

Terrence Eugene Bastarache (petitioner) v. Marie Theresa Bastarache (respondent)

(FDSJ-568-11; 2012 NBQB 75; 2012 NBBR 75)

Indexed As: Bastarache v. Bastarache

Répertorié: Bastarache v. Bastarache

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Family Division

Judicial District of Saint John

Walsh, J.

March 7, 2012.

Summary:

Résumé:

The parties married in 1981 and separated in 1999. The wife remained in the marital home with the children (now adults) and had to go on social assistance until 2006. The husband sought a divorce and an equal division of marital property. The wife sought spousal support retroactive to 1999 and an exclusion or unequal division of the marital home.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, granted the divorce, ordered an equal division of the marital home and the husband's pension, ordered the husband to pay lump sum retroactive spousal support of $51,268 (to be offset against the husband's interest in the marital property (nearly the same amount) and ordered the husband to pay prospective monthly spousal support of $300 until December 31, 2017.

Family Law - Topic 4001.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance and awards - Retroactive awards - The parties married in 1981 and separated in 1999 - The wife remained in the marital home with the children (now adults) and had to go on social assistance until 2006 - The 54 year old husband sought a divorce - In direct response to the husband's claim for an equal division of the marital home, the 52 year old wife sought spousal support retroactive to 1999 - Her average income was $13,100 - The husband's average income was $56,500 - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, ordered the husband to pay lump sum retroactive spousal support of $51,268 (to be offset against the husband's interest in the marital property (which was nearly the same amount) and ordered the husband to pay prospective monthly spousal support of $300 until December 31, 2017 - The wife had been in financial need since separation - She was unlikely to achieve economic self-sufficiency - She had little education or marketable skills - The husband could not be permitted to simply walk away from the obligations to his spouse that marriage created, regardless of what motivated her claim so long after the separation - The disparity was too stark - Her need, past and future, was too great - Respecting the wife's delay in bringing the support claim, the court stated that the wife was lulled into naively believing that the husband would not claim an interest in the marital home - See paragraphs 25 to 58.

Family Law - Topic 4022.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance and awards - Awards to spouse - Extent of obligation - [See Family Law - Topic 4001.1 ].

Droit de la famille - Cote 4001.1

Divorce - Mesures accessoires - Ordonnances alimentaires - Ordonnances rétroactives - [Voir Family Law - Topic 4001.1 ].

Droit de la famille - Cote 4022.1

Divorce - Mesures accessoires - Ordonnances alimentaires - Ordonnances en faveur du conjoint - Étendue de l'obligation - [Voir Family Law - Topic 4022.1 ].

Cases Noticed:

Yorke v. Yorke (2011), 378 N.B.R.(2d) 141; 973 A.P.R. 141; 2011 NBCA 79, refd to. [para. 21].

Leblanc v. Leblanc, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 217; 81 N.R. 299; 84 N.B.R.(2d) 33; 214 A.P.R. 33, refd to. [para. 21].

LeBouthillier v. LeBouthillier (1982), 39 N.B.R.(2d) 20; 103 A.P.R. 20 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Fraser v. Fraser (1983), 47 N.B.R.(2d) 364; 124 A.P.R. 364 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

C.J.G. v. L.T.G. (2011), 369 N.B.R.(2d) 202; 952 A.P.R. 202; 2011 NBCA 12, refd to. [para. 22].

Kerr v. Baranow (2011), 411 N.R. 200; 300 B.C.A.C. 1; 509 W.A.C. 1; 274 O.A.C. 1; 2011 SCC 10, refd to. [para. 27].

D.B.S. v. S.R.G., [2006] 2 S.C.R. 231; 351 N.R. 201; 391 A.R. 297; 377 W.A.C. 297; 2006 SCC 37, refd to. [para. 27].

Scott v. Jabora-Scott (2011), 368 N.B.R.(2d) 281; 949 A.P.R. 281; 2011 NBCA 7, refd to. [para. 29].

Beardsall v. Dubois, [2009] O.T.C. Uned. 235; 2009 CarswellOnt 559 (Sup. Ct. Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 31].

Bracklow v. Bracklow, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 420; 236 N.R. 79; 120 B.C.A.C. 211; 196 W.A.C. 211, refd to. [para. 36].

Chutter v. Chutter et al. (2008), 263 B.C.A.C. 109; 443 W.A.C. 109; 2008 BCCA 507, refd to. [para. 36].

Fisher v. Fisher (2008), 232 O.A.C. 213; 2008 ONCA 11, refd to. [para. 37].

Crowe v. Crowe, [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 445; 2011 BCSC 445, refd to. [para. 41].

Smith v. Smith (2011), 375 N.B.R.(2d) 208; 969 A.P.R. 208; 2011 NBCA 66, refd to. [para. 42].

Murray v. Murray, [2003] O.T.C. 780; 40 R.F.L.(5th) 244 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 44].

Chalifoux v. Chalifoux (2008), 425 A.R. 361; 418 W.A.C. 361; 2008 ABCA 70, refd to. [para. 45].

Vanasse v. Seguin, [2008] O.T.C. Uned. E92 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 45].

Lake v. Lake, [2008] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. Uned. 49; 2008 NLUFC 12, refd to. [para. 47].

Adams v. French, [2007] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 29; 2007 NSSC 57 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 47].

Kelly v. Rockwell (2010), 359 N.B.R.(2d) 351; 929 A.P.R. 351; 2010 NBQB 168 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 53].

Brown v. Brown (2012), 382 N.B.R.(2d) 380; 988 A.P.R. 380; 2012 NBCA 11, refd to. [para. 55].

Hartshorne v. Hartshorne, [2009] B.C.T.C. Uned. 698; 2009 BCSC 698, varied in part (2010), 289 B.C.A.C. 244; 489 W.A.C. 244; 2010 BCCA 327, refd to. [para. 57].

Newman v. Tibbetts (2005), 283 N.B.R.(2d) 63; 740 A.P.R. 63; 2005 NBCA 37, refd to. [para. 60].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Gordon, Marie L., An Update on Retroactive Child and Spousal Support: Five Years After S.(D.B.) v. G.(S.R.) (2012), p. 66 [para. 45].

Counsel:

Avocats:

David M. Lutz, Q.C., for the petitioner;

For the respondent, per se.

This matter was heard by Walsh, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, Judicial District of Saint John, who delivered the following decision on March 7, 2012.