Blanchard v. Blanchard, (1994) 154 N.B.R.(2d) 321 (FD)

• Judge: Graser, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: August 31, 1994
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (1994), 154 N.B.R.(2d) 321 (FD)

Blanchard v. Blanchard (1994), 154 N.B.R.(2d) 321 (FD);

    154 R.N.-B.(2e) 321; 395 A.P.R. 321

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

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

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

Donald Clifford Blanchard (petitioner/respondent) v. Dianna Florence Blanchard (respondent/applicant)

(FDSJ-628-90)

Indexed As: Blanchard v. Blanchard

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Family Division

Judicial District of Saint John

Graser, J.

October 26, 1994.

Summary:

A husband and wife's Memorandum of Settlement, settling all matters under the Divorce Act and Marital Property Act, was incorporated into the divorce judgment. Spousal support was based on a formula. The husband's gross pension per month was one of the components. The wife applied to the court to clarify the value of the gross pension per month and whether a bridging pension amount should be included in the spousal support order.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, held that the gross pension included both the basic pension and the bridging pension amount.

Family Law - Topic 880.28

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Pensions - A hus­band agreed to pay spousal support upon his retirement based on a formula includ­ing his gross pension per month - The agreement was incorporated into the di­vorce judgment - The husband's $3,455 per month pension included a basic pen­sion of $2,615 plus a bridging pension amount of $840 - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, held that both pension amounts constituted gross pension for the purpose of the for­mula - The issue was spousal support, not isolated as a division of pension benefits - The words "gross pension" were to be interpreted fairly and objectively to include both components of the husband's pension and should not be subjected to exclusions which were neither contemplated nor expressly stated.

Family Law - Topic 4010

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Periodic payments - [See Fam­ily Law - Topic 880.28 ].

Cases Noticed:

Rideout v. Rideout (1994), 148 N.B.R.(2d) 275; 378 A.P.R. 275 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 35].

Ablaka v. Ablaka (1991), 33 R.F.L.(3d) 369 (Ont. U.F.C.), refd to. [para. 35].

Caisse populaire de Caraquet Ltée v. Féd­ération des Caisses populaires Aca­diennes Ltée (1988), 87 N.B.R.(2d) 33; 221 A.P.R. 33 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 35].

Belyea v. Belyea (1990), 111 N.B.R.(2d) 300; 277 A.P.R. 300 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 36].

Hilderley v. Hilderley (1989), 21 R.F.L. (3d) 383 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 37].

Statutes Noticed:

Marital Property Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. M-1.1, sect. 33 [para. 34]; sect. 36, sect. 44(12) [para. 26].

Pension Benefits Act, S.N.B. 1987, c. P-5.1, sect. 1(1) [para. 23]; sect. 32(1)(c), sect. 32(2) [para. 20]; sect. 36(1) [para. 15]; sect. 44(2) [para. 14]; sect. 44(8) [para. 22]; sect. 44(16) [para. 17].

Counsel:

Philip H. Pugsley, for the applicant;

Shelley G. Courser, for the respondent.

This application was heard on August 31, 1994, before Graser, J., of the New Bruns­wick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Divi­sion, Judicial District of Saint John, who delivered the following judgment on October 26, 1994.