Geddes v. Geddes, (1991) 74 Man.R.(2d) 299 (QBFD)

• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: August 30, 1991
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1991), 74 Man.R.(2d) 299 (QBFD)

Geddes v. Geddes (1991), 74 Man.R.(2d) 299 (QBFD)

MLB headnote and full text

Joan Geddes (petitioner) v. Walter Milne Geddes (respondent)

(Suit No. FD-88-01-14444)

Indexed As: Geddes v. Geddes

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Family Division

Winnipeg Centre

Hamilton, A.C.J.

August 30, 1991.

Summary:

At issue in this case was the division of certain assets between a husband and wife, namely, two bequests to the wife, some of which were invested, condominium appli­ances and furniture.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, divided these assets ac­cordingly.

Family Law - Topic 880.3

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Exempt acquisitions - Bequest - During cohabitation a wife received two inheritances, which she deposited into a bank account in her own name - She pur­chased investments, in her own name using some of the funds - The re­mainder was left in the account, which was at least partly used for common pur­poses - Pur­chases of Canada Savings Bonds were easily traceable to one inheri­tance, but while purchases of invest­ment certificates from time to time orig­inated with inherit­ance monies, the money from maturing certificates became so inter­mingled with funds used for common purposes that they lost their separate iden­tity - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, considered five questions in determining whether the in­heritance monies were still exempt from sharing - The court exempted the amount of the Bonds but not the certificates - See paragraphs 4 to 34.

Family Law - Topic 880.18

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Tracing - [See Fam­ily Law - Topic 880.3 ].

Cases Noticed:

Hilderman v. Hilderman (1985), 34 Man.R.(2d) 177, refd to. [para. 21].

Stefaniuk v. Stefaniuk (1987), 48 Man.R.(2d) 111, consd. [para. 23].

Smith v. Smith (1980), 3 Man.R.(2d) 206; 18 R.F.L.(2d) 38, refd to. [para. 24].

Simkin v. Simkin (1979), 12 R.F.L.(2d) 122, refd to. [para. 25].

Burke v. Burke (1987), 47 Man.R.(2d) 216, consd. [para. 26].

Longmuir v. Longmuir (1989), 59 Man.R.(2d) 122; 21 R.F.L.(3d) 151, consd. [para. 26].

Statutes Noticed:

Marital Property Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. M-45; C.C.S.M., c. M-45, sect. 6(5) [para. 18]; sect. 7(1) [para. 35]; sect. 7(3) [para. 17]; sect. 22 [para. 19].

Counsel:

Marta Smith and Sandra Phillips, for the petitioner;

Rudolph Anderson, for the respondent.

This case was heard before Hamilton, A.C.J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, Winnipeg Centre, whose decision was delivered on August 30, 1991.