Gale Estate v. Hominick et al., (1996) 109 Man.R.(2d) 121 (QB)

• Judge: Duval, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: April 10, 1996
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1996), 109 Man.R.(2d) 121 (QB)

Gale Estate v. Hominick (1996), 109 Man.R.(2d) 121 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Vernon Frederick Gale, as administrator de bonis non of the Estate of Brian Charles Gale, Kelly Ann Cloutier, Tyler Warren Cloutier, an infant who sues by his grandmother and next friend Therese Marie Gale, the said Vernon Frederick Gale, as executor of the Last Will and Testament of the said Therese Marie Gale, Vernon Frederick Gale, Gordon Robert Gale, John Paul Gale, Vernon Harry Gale, Marguerite Ruth McAree and Theresa Rene Beerman (plaintiffs) v. Robin Alexander Hominick, Ethel Hominick, John Lesko and Robert Joseph Lewis Pouliot (defendants)

(Suit No. CI 93-01-73524)

Indexed As: Gale Estate v. Hominick et al.

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

Duval, J.

April 10, 1996.

Summary:

A common law wife sought a declaration that she was entitled to benefits under the Fatal Accidents Act.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application.

Civil Rights - Topic 925

Discrimination - Marital status - Common law relationships - The 1970 Fatal Acci­dents Act, s. 4(1), allowed a claim for damages for accidental death by the wife of a deceased - A 1985 amendment ex­tended the right to a common law wife - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench concluded that a narrow interpretation of the word "wife" in the 1970 Act (to in­clude only a married person) constituted discriminatory treatment on the basis of marital status under the Human Rights Code which applied retroactively - Ac­cordingly, the word "wife" in the 1970 Act must be read to include a common law wife - See paragraphs 49 to 57.

Statutes - Topic 502

Interpretation - General principles - In­tention of legislature - [See Statutes -Topic 516 ].

Statutes - Topic 516

Interpretation - General principles - Ordi­nary meaning of words - The 1970 Fatal Accidents Act, s. 4(1), allowed a claim for damages for accidental death by the wife of a deceased - The word "wife" was not defined in the Act - A 1985 amendment extended the right to claim benefits to a common law wife - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench held that the ordinary meaning of the word "wife" described a person who had entered into a form of marriage pursuant to the Marriage Act - The amendment added a new category of persons who could claim benefits and did not denote an intention to clarify the meaning of the word "wife" in the 1970 Act - See paragraphs 45 to 48.

Torts - Topic 7554

Fatal accidents - Persons entitled - Wife defined - The 1970 Fatal Accidents Act, s. 4(1), allowed a claim for damages by the wife of a deceased - Pursuant to a 1985 amendment, a common law spouse was entitled to claim for damages - A com­mon law wife claimed damages under s. 4(1) in respect of the death of her spouse who died in 1983 - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench held that the common law wife was a wife entitled to claim damages under s. 4(1) of the 1970 Fatal Accidents Act.

Cases Noticed:

Miron and Valliere v. Trudel et al., [1995] 2 S.C.R. 418; 181 N.R. 253; 81 O.A.C. 253, refd to. [para. 13].

Thiessen v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corp. (1990), 63 Man.R.(2d) 8 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1990), 113 N.R. 318; 68 Man.R.(2d) 320 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

Hutchinson v. Official Administrator (1963), 41 D.L.R.(2d) 658 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

Dixie v. Royal Columbian Hospital, [1941] 1 W.W.R. 389 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

Egan and Nesbit v. Canada, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 513; 182 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 28].

Louis v. Esslinger and Helm; Dunphy and Public Trustee (B.C.) v. Esslinger, Helm and Louis, [1981] 3 W.W.R. 350; 15 C.C.L.T. 137 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

Gingell v. R. - see Gingell v. Alberta.

Gingell v. Alberta, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 86; 5 N.R. 443, refd to. [para. 32].

Brule v. Plummer - see Plummer and Brule v. Brule, Air Canada and Great-West Life Assurance Co.

Plummer and Brule v. Brule, Air Canada and Great-West Life Assurance Co., [1979] 2 S.C.R. 343; 25 N.R. 118, refd to. [para. 34].

Montreal West (Town) v. Hough, [1931] S.C.R. 113, refd to. [para. 35].

Cummings et al. v. Fleming, [1980] 4 W.W.R. 688 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 39].

Trowsdale (Thompson) v. McDonald (1980), 20 B.C.L.R. 1 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 39].

McGuire and McGuire v. Fermini (1984), 62 N.S.R.(2d) 104; 136 A.P.R. 104 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 39].

Garbett Estate et al. v. Universal Helicopters Newfoundland Ltd. et al. (1986), 61 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 302; 185 A.P.R. 302 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 39].

Wessell et al. v. Kinsmen Club of Sault Ste. Marie Ontario Inc. (1982), 137 D.L.R.(3d) 96 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 41].

T.D.L. v. L.R.L. (1994), 114 D.L.R.(4th) 709 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 42].

Bagaric v. Juric and Bagaric (1984), 2 O.A.C. 35; 44 O.R.(2d) 638 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].

L.D.T. v. Director, Social Allowances Act (Westman Region) (1993), 85 Man.R.(2d) 126; 41 W.A.C. 126 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].

Welk v. Social Services Appeal Board (Sask.), [1986] 5 W.W.R. 478 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [Schedule A].

Mitts v. Leclair and Leclair (1957), 10 D.L.R.(2d) 662 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [Schedule A].

Fraser v. Haight et al. (1987), 36 D.L.R.(4th) 459 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [Schedule A].

Leroux v. Co-Operators General Insurance Co. (1991), 50 O.A.C. 220; 83 D.L.R.(4th) 694 (C.A.), reving. (1990), 65 D.L.R.(4th) 702 (H.C.), refd to. [Schedule A].

Angus v. Hart, Angus and Sun Alliance Insurance Co. (1988), 87 N.R. 200; 30 O.A.C. 210; 52 D.L.R.(4th) 193 (S.C.C.), refd to. [Schedule A].

R. v. Stevens, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 1153; 86 N.R. 85; 28 O.A.C. 243, refd to. [Schedule A].

R. v. Gamble - see Gamble v. R.

Gamble v. R., [1988] 2 S.C.R. 595; 89 N.R. 161; 31 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [Schedule A].

Benner v. Canada (Secretary of State) (1993), 155 N.R. 321; 105 D.L.R.(4th) 121 (F.C.A.), refd to. [Schedule A].

Crease v. Canada (Minister of State for Multiculturalism and Citizenship) et al. (1994), 78 F.T.R. 192 (T.D.), refd to. [Schedule A].

Statutes Noticed:

Fatal Accidents Act, R.S.M. 1970, c. F-50, sect. 4(1), sect. 4(5) [para. 3].

Human Rights Code, S.M. 1987-88, c. 45; C.C.S.M., c. H-175, sect. 15(2) [para. 17]; sect. 58 [para. 10].

Interpretation Act, R.S.M. 1970, c. I-80, sect. 10 [para. 21]; sect. 13 [para. 8]; sect. 27(2) [para. 6].

Interpretation Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. I-80; C.C.S.M., c. I-80, sect. 12 [para. 8]; sect. 26(2) [para. 6].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Maxwell, Interpretation of Statutes (12th Ed. 1969), c. 2, p. 29 [para. 39].

Counsel:

Clive L. Ramage, for the plaintiff;

Joan G. McKelvey, for the defendants.

This application was heard before Duval, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the follow­ing judgment on April 10, 1996.