Burchill v. Savoie, 2009 NSSC 205

• Judge: O'Neil, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: February 16, 2009
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2009 NSSC 205;(2009), 279 N.S.R.(2d) 320 (SC)

Burchill v. Savoie (2009), 279 N.S.R.(2d) 320 (SC);

    887 A.P.R. 320

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JL.009

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

(1201-061267; 2009 NSSC 205)

Indexed As: Burchill v. Savoie

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

O'Neil, J.

June 29, 2009.

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 determined the issues accordingly.

Family Law - Topic 631

Husband and wife - Marital property - Matrimonial home - Right to possession of - 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 - At issue in the division of property was the timing of the sale of the matrimonial home - The husband wanted to delay the sale, while the wife wanted the sale to occur as soon as possible - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court held that the home was to be sold as soon as possible - The husband was essentially seeking an order for exclusive possession - However, it was essential that the parties disentangle their personal finances and separate their joint property - They both required certainty when evaluating their incomes and expenses - The husband was to have an option to purchase the home at its appraised value by a certain date - Failing that, the home was to be sold publicly - See paragraphs 12 to 20.

Family Law - Topic 4012

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Awards - Lump sum and periodic payments - When the parties met in British Columbia in 1994, the husband was employed in the high technology industry, earning $85,000 annually, 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 - The husband entered a B.Ed. program in September 2006 - At the same time, the wife became a part-time, rather than full-time, resident - In December 2006, the husband petitioned for divorce and sought spousal support - The court determined that the husband was entitled to support - An income of $65,000 per year was imputed to the wife and periodic payments were ordered - The court also ordered the wife to make a lump sum spousal support payment of $300,000 - Disagreements arose regarding the wording of the order - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court clarified that the lump sum and periodic payments were not mutually exclusive - They were separate components of spousal support that complemented each other - The decision did not contemplate periodic spousal support ending when lump sum support began - The periodic support was of indefinite duration and was to be calculated frequently, given that the parties' incomes were fluid - The Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines were to be used as a reference on an ongoing basis - See paragraphs 28 to 31.

Family Law - Topic 4021.5

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Awards - Support tables (incl. non-divorce cases) - [See Family Law - Topic 4012 ].

Family Law - Topic 4022.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Awards - To spouse - Extent of obligation - [See Family Law - Topic 4012 ].

Cases Noticed:

Goodwin v. Goodwin (2009), 276 N.S.R.(2d) 239; 880 A.P.R. 239; 2009 NSSC 109, refd to. [para. 15].

Simmons v. Simmons (2001), 196 N.S.R.(2d) 140; 613 A.P.R. 140; 2001 CarswellNS 252 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 20].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Canada, Department of Justice, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines: The Final Version - see Rogerson, Carol, and Thompson, Rollie, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines: The Final Version.

Rogerson, Carol, and Thompson, Rollie, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines: The Final Version (2008), generally [paras. 30, 31].

Counsel:

Kenzie MacKinnon, for the petitioner;

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

This action was heard at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on February 16, 2009, by O'Neil, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on June 29, 2009.