Brown v. Brown, (1986) 73 N.S.R.(2d) 197 (FC)

• Case Date: June 02, 1986
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1986), 73 N.S.R.(2d) 197 (FC)

Brown v. Brown (1986), 73 N.S.R.(2d) 197 (FC);

    176 A.P.R. 197

MLB headnote and full text

Brown v. Brown

(1986 H81-555)

Indexed As: Brown v. Brown

Nova Scotia Family Court

Daley, F.C.J.

June 2, 1986.

Summary:

A husband and wife divorced and the husband was granted custody of a child raised by him and his wife. Subsequently it was agreed that the wife would take custody. The wife applied for maintenance for the child. The Nova Scotia Family Court granted the wife's application for maintenance.

Family Law - Topic 4014

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Awards - Children defined - Review of decision that person stands in loco parentis to child for Divorce Act purposes - For purposes of the Divorce Act a husband was found to stand in loco parentis to a child raised by him and his wife - The husband originally had custody of the child, but later the wife took custody and applied for maintenance for the child - The husband resisted, arguing that he no longer stood in loco parentis - The Nova Scotia Family Court rejected the husband's argument, holding that once a person was found to stand in loco parentis under the Divorce Act, that finding was not subject to a subsequent review - See paragraphs 1 to 14.

Cases Noticed:

Aksugyak v. Aksugyak (1974), 17 R.F. L. 224, refd to. [para. 10].

Timmerman v. Timmerman and Rolley (1976), 27 R.F.L. 312, refd to. [para. 10].

Re O'Neil and Rideout (1975), 54 D.L.R.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 10].

Russell v. Russell and Bast (1983), 24 Sask.R. 71, refd to. [para. 10].

Bertin v. Bertin (1982), 44 N.B.R.(2d) 421; 116 A.P.R. 421, refd to. [para. 10].

Leveridge v. Leveridge (1974), 15 R.F.L. 33, refd to. [para. 10].

McCarthy v. McCarthy (1984), 44 R.F. L.(2d) 92, agreed with [paras. 10, 12].

Smith v. Smith (1981), 20 R.F.L.(2d) 393, refd to. [para. 10].

Schryver v. Covey (1984), 65 N.S.R.(2d) 186; 147 A.P.R. 186, refd to. [para. 10].

Shtitz v. C.N.R., [1927] 1 W.W.R. 193, refd to. [para. 10].

Pickup v. Pickup (1985), 34 Man.R.(2d) 217; 40 R.F.L. (2d) 188, refd to. [para. 10].

Mero v. Mero (1983), 32 R.F.L.(2d) 137, refd to. [para. 10].

Morton v. Morton et al. (1983), 43 A.R. 182, refd to. [para. 10].

Proctor v. Proctor (1975), 22 R.F.L. 217, refd to. [para. 10].

Groom v. Groom (1979), 10 R.F.L.(2d) 257, refd to. [para. 10].

Knox v. Knox, [1982] W.D.F.L. 294, refd to. [para. 10].

Harrington v. Harrington, 22 R.F.L. (2d) 40; 123 D.L.R.(3d) 689, appld. [para. 13].

Young v. Young, 29 R.F.L. 391, refd to. [para. 25].

Statutes Noticed:

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. D-8, sect. 11.

Counsel:

Douglas Routledge, for Mr. Brown;

Deborah Conrad, for Mrs. Brown.

This application was heard on April 16 and 17, 1986, before Daley, F.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Family Court, who delivered the following decision on June 2, 1986: