Burchill v. Savoie,

• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Judge: O'Neil
• Neutral Citation: 2011 NSSC 236
• Citation: (2011), 305 N.S.R.(2d) 253 (SC),2011 NSSC 236,305 NSR(2d) 253,(2011), 305 NSR(2d) 253 (SC),305 N.S.R.(2d) 253
• Date: 06 July 2011
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)

Burchill v. Savoie (2011), 305 N.S.R.(2d) 253 (SC);

    966 A.P.R. 253

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2011] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JL.040

David Gordon Burchill (petitioner) v. Isabelle Savoie (respondent)

(1201-061267; SFHD-50075; 2011 NSSC 236)

Indexed As: Burchill v. Savoie

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Family Division

O'Neil, A.C.J.

July 6, 2011.

Summary:

When the parties met in British Columbia in 1994, the husband was employed in the high technology industry and the wife, who had a medical degree and a graduate degree in health administration, was employed as a researcher. The parties began cohabiting in 1995, married in 1996, and had two children, born in 1999 and 2001. In 2003, they relocated to Nova Scotia so that the wife could pursue a specialty in radiology. The husband stayed at home with the children. The parties separated in 2005. In December 2006, the husband petitioned for divorce and sought related relief.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at (2008), 270 N.S.R.(2d) 134; 865 A.P.R. 134, granted a divorce and determined the related issues. Disagreements arose over the proposed language of the corollary relief judgment and the parties raised an issue regarding the division of property.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at (2009), 279 N.S.R.(2d) 320; 887 A.P.R. 320, determined the issues accordingly. The parties made submissions on costs.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Family Division, awarded the husband costs of $35,000, inclusive of taxes and disbursements.

Family Law - Topic 966

Husband and wife - Actions between husband and wife - Practice - Costs (incl. interim costs) - [See Family Law - Topic 4175 ].

Family Law - Topic 2189

Custody and access - Practice - Costs (incl. suit money or interim costs) - [See Family Law - Topic 4175 ].

Family Law - Topic 4175

Divorce - Practice - Costs - General (incl. considerations) - After a 6.5 day trial of matrimonial issues, the husband's legal costs were approximately $74,221 - The parties disagreed on the corollary relief judgment - This increased the husband's total costs to $118,774 - He sought a lump sum costs award of $65,000 - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Family Division, awarded the husband costs of $35,000, inclusive of taxes and disbursements - The husband was the more successful party - The wife's conduct was a factor that weighed heavily in favour of the husband's claim - She was not forthright in some of her evidence and, significantly, strategic considerations motivated her to reduce her employment to part-time - The court had imputed income to her as a result - The wife's approach had unnecessarily prolonged the litigation - The amount involved was $200,000 to $300,000, based solely on the value of the lump sum spousal support award to the husband - The parties' principal monetary disagreement had been related to spousal support - Based on that amount, scale 2 of Tariff A set costs at $22,750 - However, Tariff A also provided for additional costs based on the length of the trial - Given the history of the matter, that represented an additional $14,000 - See paragraphs 24 to 34.

Cases Noticed:

Tamlyn v. Wilcox (2010), 295 N.S.R.(2d) 186; 935 A.P.R. 186; 2010 NSSC 363 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 15].

N.D.L. v. M.S.L. (2010), 289 N.S.R.(2d) 303; 916 A.P.R. 303; 2010 NSSC 159 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 16].

Pelrine v. Pelrine (2007), 255 N.S.R.(2d) 53; 814 A.P.R. 53; 2007 NSSC 123 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 17].

Robar v. Arseneau (2010), 297 N.S.R.(2d) 193; 943 A.P.R. 193; 2010 NSSC 175, refd to. [para. 20].

Provost v. Marsden (2009), 286 N.S.R.(2d) 138; 909 A.P.R. 138; 2009 NSSC 365 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 21].

Provost v. Marsden (2010), 296 N.S.R.(2d) 176; 940 A.P.R. 176; 2010 NSSC 423, refd to. [para. 21].

A.R. v. G.R., [2010] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 247; 2010 NSSC 377 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 22].

A.R. v. G.R., [2010] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 269; 2010 NSSC 424 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 22].

Peraud v. Peraud, [2011] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 36; 2011 NSSC 80 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 25].

Counsel:

Kenzie MacKinnon, for the petitioner;

Lynn Reierson, Q.C., for the respondent.

This matter was heard by way of written submissions received between December 2010 and May 2011 by O'Neil, A.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Family Division, who delivered the following written decision on July 6, 2011.