Digest: Rapp v Baumann, 2018 SKQB 134

• Date: May 01, 2018

Reported as: 2018 SKQB 134

Docket Number: QB17520 , FLD 157/09 JCR

Court: Court of Queen's Bench

Date: 2018-05-01

Judges:

• Brown

Subjects:

• Family Law � Spousal Support Family Law � Family Property � Evaluation

Digest: The parties began living together in August 2003. The petitioner moved to the dairy farm operated by the respondent. He asked her to leave in May 2009 and the petitioner initiated this action in June, requesting occupational rent, division of family property and spousal support. When the parties met, the petitioner was 38 years of age and working as a bartender. She had held different jobs previously but had never pursued a career prior to her relationship with the respondent. She did not own any property, nor did she have any savings or other assets. While living with the respondent she helped look after his two children, the house and yard, and worked in the dairy barn. She testified that she received no pay for her chores, but the respondent deposited $1,000 per month into her bank account to cover the cost of household items, the children�s activities and similar expenses. After leaving the family home, she returned to it and removed the majority of the furniture from it. The petitioner lived successively with her mother in 2009, with a friend for two years to whom she paid rent, and then she moved in with her new partner in 2012. She received sporadic spousal support from the respondent totaling $3,500, but did not record the dates of payment. The respondent had also made monthly car payments of $460 on her behalf from July 2009 to June 2012. The respondent had purchased the dairy farm in partnership with his uncle in 1998 and incurred significant debt in 1999 when he bought his uncle�s interest for $400,000. He paid off the debt in 2007 with the proceeds of a loan of $600,000 from Farm Credit Corporation. The loan was still outstanding as at June 2009. In 1999, the respondent�s brother joined him and they formed a 50-50 partnership. Each of them had his own house on the farm property. They both took monthly income of $1,000 to $1,500 from the farm and the partnership paid all of their household utilities and services. The respondent argued that the family property should be valued as at the date of petition. He also claimed exemption under s. 23 of The Family Property Act for his interest in the dairy operation as at August 2005, when the parties became spouses, and for the family home,...