Butts Estate, Re, (1999) 96 O.T.C. 61 (GD)

• Judge: Killeen, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: December 04, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1999), 96 O.T.C. 61 (GD)

Butts Estate, Re (1999), 96 O.T.C. 61 (GD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] O.T.C. TBEd. MY.113

Eugenie Valentine Watson Rodger, Estate Trustee for the Estate of Robert Earl Butts, deceased (applicant) v. Elizabeth Charlotte Butts (respondent)

(Court File No. 25812)

Indexed As: Butts Estate, Re

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Killeen, J.

April 8, 1999.

Summary:

Spouses married in 1952. After the husband obtained a Ph.D., the wife assumed a traditional role of homemaker. They separated in 1971. The wife obtained independent legal advice and had her lawyers draft a separation agreement. The agreement required the husband to pay the wife $500 per month for the rest of her life. The spouses intended the agreement to be a final settlement of their respective rights. The agreement's support provisions were incorporated into the parties divorce in 1972. Thereafter, the husband twice remarried. He died in 1986, leaving his entire estate to his last spouse. The first wife, who was 69 years old and living below the poverty line, claimed support from the husband's estate. Due to medical problems, she had a reduced life expectancy of 12 years (half the normal expectancy). The trustee of the estate applied for advice respecting the first wife's claim. The wife counter applied for support under the Succession Law Reform Act.

The Ontario Court (General Division) allowed the wife's counter application and ordered the estate to pay her $2,500 per month. The court stated that a lump sum resolution was desirable in the circumstances and requested further submissions on the matter.

Family Law - Topic 6608

Dependents' relief legislation - General principles - What constitutes "spouse" - See paragraphs 34 and 35.

Family Law - Topic 6627

Dependents' relief legislation - Persons entitled to relief - Widow divorced from husband - See paragraphs 27 to 48.

Family Law - Topic 6664

Dependents' relief legislation - Entitlement - Whether a claimant was a "dependent" - See paragraphs 34 and 35.

Family Law - Topic 6673

Dependents' relief legislation - Entitlement - Where adequate provision for dependent not made in will - See paragraphs 27 to 48.

Family Law - Topic 6685

Dependents' relief legislation - Considerations in making awards - Separation agreements - See paragraphs 27 to 48.

Family Law - Topic 6689

Dependents' relief legislation - Considerations in making awards - Economic status of claimant - See paragraphs 27 to 48.

Family Law - Topic 6704

Dependents' relief legislation - Awards - Periodic payments - Widow - See paragraphs 27 to 48.

Family Law - Topic 6705

Dependents' relief legislation - Awards - Lump sum payment - Widow - See paragraphs 27 to 48.

Cases Noticed:

Mannion v. Mannion Estate, Lytle and Mannion (1984), 2 O.A.C. 312; 45 O.R.(2d) 339 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 41].

Statutes Noticed:

Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S-26, sect. 57 [para. 34].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Osterhoff, Some Aspects of Support of Dependents (1982-83), 12 E.T.R. 197, p. 200 [para. 35].

Counsel:

Michael Menear, for the applicant/counter respondent;

Dennis Burns, for the respondent/counter applicant.

Killeen, J., of the Ontario Court (General Division), heard this application and counter application on December 4, 1998, and released the following reasons for judgment on April 8, 1999.