Giesbrecht v. Giesbrecht, (2013) 411 Sask.R. 278 (FD)

• Judge: Danyliuk, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: Tuesday January 15, 2013
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2013), 411 Sask.R. 278 (FD);2013 SKQB 16

Giesbrecht v. Giesbrecht (2013), 411 Sask.R. 278 (FD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] Sask.R. TBEd. FE.011

Janice Faye Giesbrecht (petitioner) v. Garry Bernard Giesbrecht (respondent)

(2007 Div. No. 118; 2013 SKQB 16)

Indexed As: Giesbrecht v. Giesbrecht

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Family Law Division

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Danyliuk, J.

January 15, 2013.

Summary:

Spouses divorced. In 2009, they entered into minutes of settlement containing terms dividing family property. The husband applied to amend the minutes to provide a specific reference to a waiver of any division of unadjusted pensionable earnings under the Canada Pension Plan.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, dismissed the application.

Family Law - Topic 880.28

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Particular property - Pensions - Spouses divorced - In 2009, they entered into minutes of settlement containing terms dividing family property - The husband applied to amend the minutes to provide a specific reference to a waiver of any division of unadjusted pensionable earnings under the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, dismissed the application - First, the facts were in dispute - The husband waited until the last possible moment to seek relief from the court - The delay had precluded even a summary viva voce hearing - Second, the sole manner in which CPP waiver could be effected was for the parties to enter into an interspousal contract which incorporated s. 38(5) of the Family Property Act (Sask.) and which also met the criteria set out in s. 55.2(3) of the Canada Pension Plan - Here, none of that was present.

Government Programs - Topic 1228

Canada Pension Plan - Entitlement - Division of unadjusted pensionable earnings - [See Family Law - Topic 880.28].

Cases Noticed:

Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Wiemer (1998), 228 N.R. 341; 42 R.F.L.(4th) 242 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

Blackwood v. Canada (Minister of National Health and Welfare) et al. (1993), 169 N.R. 236; 3 R.F.L.(4th) 337 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

Canada (Minister of National Health and Welfare) v. Preece (1983), C.E.B. & P.G.R. 8914; 1983 LNCPEN 1 (Can. Pen. App. Bd.), refd to. [para. 17].

Crowe v. Crowe (2001), 205 Sask.R. 241; 2001 SKQB 202 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 19].

Leippi v. Derbyshire (2008), 316 Sask.R. 114; 2008 SKQB 209 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 20].

Counsel:

Janice Faye Giesbrecht, petitioner, on her own behalf;

Angela M. Eagle, for the respondent.

This application was heard by Danyliuk, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following fiat on January 15, 2013.