Billingsley v. Billingsley, (1991) 4 B.C.A.C. 201 (CA)

• Judge: Hutcheon, Legg and Wood, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: May 21, 1991
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (1991), 4 B.C.A.C. 201 (CA)

Billingsley v. Billingsley (1991), 4 B.C.A.C. 201 (CA);

    9 W.A.C. 201

MLB headnote and full text

James Richard Billingsley (petitioner/respondent) v. Catherine Alice Billingsley (respondent/appellant)

(CA011517/CA011527)

Indexed As: Billingsley v. Billingsley

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Hutcheon, Legg and Wood, JJ.A.

September 5, 1991.

Summary:

A husband and wife divorced. The husband petitioned for a division of assets under the Family Relations Act. The assets were divided accordingly. See 22 R.F.L.(3d) 325. The wife appealed and the husband cross-appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part and dismissed the cross-appeal.

Family Law - Topic 876

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Family or matrimonial assets - A husband and wife separated in 1981 - In 1984 the husband purchased a house using an R.H.O.S.P. and a term deposit started during the marriage - The wife claimed that the house was a family asset because the R.H.O.S.P. and the term deposit were family assets - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the house became a family asset upon divorce, but the wife was not entitled to a share of the house - The court noted that the trial judge adequately compensated the wife for her share of the R.H.O.S.P. and the term deposit - See paragraphs 1 to 21.

Family Law - Topic 880.47

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Company shares - A husband acquired company shares after he and his wife separated - An issue arose over whether the various shares were family assets and whether they were sharable with his wife - The British Columbia Court of Appeal dealt with the shares accordingly - See paragraphs 22 to 32.

Family Law - Topic 882

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Considerations - Income tax - A husband accumulated a term deposit during his marriage - The trial judge held that the term deposit was a family asset and valued it at $88,586 - The husband argued that the judge erred in failing to consider the income tax liabilities of an income averaging annuity contract associated with the term deposit - The British Columbia Court of Appeal rejected the husband's argument - See paragraphs 34 to 37.

Family Law - Topic 967

Husband and wife - Actions between husband and wife - Practice - Interest on awards - At trial the judge awarded the wife interest on the amount of compensation ordered under the Family Relations Act, 1979 - The British Columbia Court of Appeal affirmed the award of interest - See paragraphs 38 to 41.

Cases Noticed:

Gourlay v. Gourlay, [1985] W.D.F.L. 1574; [1985] B.C.W.L.D. 2706; 33 A.C.W.S.(2d) 169 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

Sidwell v. Sidwell (1984), 42 R.F.L.(2d) 209 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

Newson v. Newson (1986), 2 R.F.L.(3d) 137; 3 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1; 27 D.L.R. (4th) 738 (C.A.), consd. [paras. 10-13].

Norton v. Norton (1989), 19 R.F.L.(3d) 181 (B.C.C.A.), appld. [paras. 14, 17, 29].

Carr v. Carr (1982), 30 R.F.L.(2d) 63, refd to. [para. 16].

Fennings v. Fennings (1979), 12 R.F.L.(2d) 74, refd to. [para. 16].

Tratch v. Tratch (1981), 30 B.C.L.R. 98 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

Young v. Young (1991), 29 R.F.L.(3d) 113, refd to. [para. 35].

Murchie v. Murchie (1984), 39 R.F.L.(2d) 385 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Rawluk v. Rawluk (1986), 55 O.R.(2d) 704 (H.C.J.), dist. [paras. 38, 39].

Graham v. Grant (1990), 46 B.C.L.R.(2d) 151 (C.A.), dist. [paras. 38, 39].

Grover v. Grover, [1981] 1 W.W.R. 203, dist. [para. 40].

Statutes Noticed:

Family Relations Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 121, sect. 43 [para. 18]; sect. 43(2) [para. 19]; sect. 51 [para. 19]; sect. 51(c) [para. 20]; sect. 51(d) [para. 29]; sect. 51(f) [para. 20].

Counsel:

Rosemary L. Nash, for the appellant;

   S.L. Levine and Mark Thompson, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on May 21, 1991, in Vancouver, B.C., before Hutcheon, Legg and Wood, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The following decision was delivered for the court by Legg, J.A., on September 5, 1991.