Reported as: 2018 SKCA 23
Docket Number: CA17133 , CACV 3181
Court: Court of Appeal
- Practice and Procedure � Appeal � Stay of Proceedings � Application to Lift Stay
Digest: Pursuant to an order of the Court of Queen�s Bench [the �QB Order�], a husband turned a farming operation over to his ex-wife. The husband appealed the QB Order on grounds that it did not deal with income sharing and use of income to pay debts, expenses and taxes associated with the farm. Because of the appeal, the QB Order was stayed by operation of Rule 15(1) of The Court of Appeal Rules. The wife applied to lift the stay.
HELD: The court lifted the stay. The court�s discretion in lifting a stay is limited only by justice between the parties and appropriateness in the process directed by the court. It was possible to lift the stay and, if the appeal was ultimately allowed, equalize the interests of the parties. The court gave four reasons for lifting the stay: 1) The QB Order directed the wife to provide the husband with periodic accountings and other financial information, thereby ensuring that he had information necessary to assess how the farming operation was being managed; 2) The Court of Queen�s Bench remained seized of the matter so as to permit the parties to return to the court in event of difficulty; 3) The Court of Appeal was entitled to take into account the highly deferential standard of review with respect to discretionary orders and the impact that the application of that standard would have on the husband�s success; and 4) The husband received revenues while he was in possession of the farm and did not share any profit. It was probable that a set-off could be applied with respect to the wife�s use of the property.
- CA Rule 15(1)
- CA Rule 15(4)
- CA Rule 43
- Anderson v Braun, 2015 SKCA 112, 467 Sask R 199
- Bank of Nova Scotia v Simonot (1992), 100 Sask R 257
- Fehr v Turta, 2014 SKCA 91, 446 Sask R 1
- Felker v Easthill, 2018 SKCA 13, 2018 CarswellSask 81
- Gerski v Gerski, 2006 SKCA 66, 285 Sask R 121
- R v Creighton,  3 SCR 3, 83 CCC (3d) 346
- R v Ahenakew, 2008 SKCA 4,  2 WWR 68
- R v J.M.H., 2011 SCC 45,  3 SCR 197
- R v Vetrovec,  1 SCR 811,  1 WWR 193, 136 DLR (3d) 89, 41 NR 696, 67 CCC (2d) 1, 27 CR...