Griffiths v. Heidt et al.

• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Judge: Turcotte, J.
• Citation: 2013 SKQB 162,(2013), 419 Sask.R. 288 (FD)
• Date: 29 April 2013

Griffiths v. Heidt (2013), 419 Sask.R. 288 (FD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] Sask.R. TBEd. MY.049

Kathy Louise Griffiths (petitioner) v. Gary William Heidt (respondent) and G2 Developments Corp. (garnishee)

(2010 F.L.D. No. 297; 2013 SKQB 162)

Indexed As: Griffiths v. Heidt et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Family Law Division

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Turcotte, J.

April 29, 2013.

Summary:

The petitioner applied pursuant to s. 12.2 of the Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Act for an order declaring that G2 Developments Corp. ("G2 Corp.") was jointly and severally liable with the respondent for payments required under a maintenance order. The respondent was a shareholder of G2 Corp. He held one Class "B" non-voting share in its capital stock. The respondent was also an officer and director of G2 Corp. The other shareholders of G2 Corp. were the respondent's brother and father.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, held that G2 Corp. was jointly and severally liable with the respondent for the payments required under the maintenance order.

Family Law - Topic 2536.2

Maintenance of wives and children - Enforcement - Orders - Liability of payor's corporation - The petitioner applied pursuant to s. 12.2 of the Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Act for an order declaring that G2 Developments Corp. ("G2 Corp.") was jointly and severally liable with the respondent for payments required under a maintenance order - The respondent was a shareholder, as well as an officer and director, of G2 Corp. - He held one Class "B" non-voting share in its capital stock - The other shareholders were the respondent's brother and father - Section 12.2(1) of the Act provided that "in this section 'corporation' means a corporation that is controlled by: (a) a payor; or (b) a payor and the immediate family members of the payor" - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, held that G2 Corp. was a "corporation" within the meaning of s. 12.2(1) and that G2 Corp. was jointly and severally liable with the respondent for the payments required under the maintenance order - The voting rights under the shares in G2 Corp. were controlled by the respondent's brother who was an "immediate family member" - The respondent's brother had voted those shares in such a way as to nominate the respondent as a director of G2 Corp. and to name him as an officer of the corporation - The evidence established that the respondent and his brother were the only directors of G2 Corp. and otherwise controlled the operations and direction of the corporation.

Cases Noticed:

Bzowy v. Grover (2005), 264 Sask.R. 243; 2005 SKQB 241, refd to. [para. 20].

Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27; 221 N.R. 241; 106 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 22].

Hannah v. Warner (2008), 308 Sask.R. 167; 2008 SKQB 28, refd to. [para. 24].

Wildman v. Wildman (2006), 215 O.A.C. 239; 273 D.L.R.(4th) 37; 33 R.F.L.(6th) 237 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

Debora v. Debora (2006), 218 O.A.C. 237; 83 O.R.(3d) 81; 33 R.F.L.(6th) 252 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

Lynch v. Segal et al. (2006), 219 O.A.C. 1; 82 O.R.(3d) 641; 33 R.F.L.(6th) 279 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

Statutes Noticed:

Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Act, S.S. 1997, c. E-9.21, sect. 12.2 [para. 17].

Counsel:

Sherry L. Fitzsimmons, for the petitioner;

Kristin B. Greenough, for the respondent;

Richard J. Steponchev, for G2 Developments Corp.

This application was heard before Turcotte, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following fiat on April 29, 2013.