Koberinski v. Koberinski, (1995) 159 N.B.R.(2d) 286 (FD)

Judge:Smith, J.
Court:Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick
Case Date:February 07, 1995
Jurisdiction:New Brunswick
Citations:(1995), 159 N.B.R.(2d) 286 (FD)
 
FREE EXCERPT

Koberinski v. Koberinski (1995), 159 N.B.R.(2d) 286 (FD);

    159 R.N.-B.(2e) 286; 409 A.P.R. 286

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Harold J. Koberinski (petitioner) v. Barbara Hill Koberinski (respondent)

(FDM 770-94)

Indexed As: Koberinski v. Koberinski

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Family Division

Judicial District of Moncton

Smith, J.

February 24, 1995.

Summary:

A couple separated after 20 years of mar­riage and executed a separation agreement. The agreement required the husband to pay spousal support for five years and child support of $400/month for each of two children. The husband petitioned for divorce. The wife sought to vary the child and spousal support provisions of the separation agreement.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, extended the period of spousal support and increased child sup­port to $500/month. The court held that the separation agreement was final and binding on the division of marital property.

Family Law - Topic 660

Husband and wife - Marital property - Separation agreement - Effect of - A couple separated after 20 years of marriage and executed a separation agreement - The husband had been in middle management, but after the separation, took an early retirement offer from his employer which included an ex gratia payment of $114,120, $60,000 of which was put in an RRSP - The husband subsequently declared bank­ruptcy - The wife sought to have the ex gratia payment included in marital property - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, held that the agreement was binding and the wife was not entitled to a share of the ex gratia payment - See paragraphs 17 to 21.

Family Law - Topic 880.33

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Particular property - Severance allowance - [See Family Law - Topic 660 ].

Family Law - Topic 4006

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Effect of agreements - A couple separated after 20 years of marriage and executed a separation agreement - The agreement provided for $1,300/month spousal support to end after five years - The wife attended university and received a Bachelor of Arts degree - She was unable to obtain employment - The wife applied to have the spousal support extended - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, held that it would be unjust and inequitable to allow the termination of the spousal support to continue - The court noted that the em­ployment market had shrunk since the signing of the agreement - The court awarded the wife a $25,000 lump sum support payment - See paragraphs 22 to 27.

Family Law - Topic 4011

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Lump sum - [See Family Law - Topic 4006 ].

Family Law - Topic 4014

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - To children and children defined - A couple separated after 20 years of marriage and executed a separation agree­ment - The agreement required the hus­band to pay $400/month child support for each of their two sons - The wife applied to increase and extend child support - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, stated that the agreement anticipated that the wife would obtain steady employment - The court held that the change in the age of the children increased their living costs - The court increased child support to $500/month per child - See paragraphs 22 to 28.

Family Law - Topic 4022.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - To wife - Extent of obligation - [See Family Law - Topic 4006 ].

Cases Noticed:

Pelech v. Pelech, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 801; 76 N.R. 81; 7 R.F.L.(3d) 225; 14 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 641; [1987] 4 W.W.R. 481; 17 C.P.C.(2d) 1, refd to. [para. 20].

Richardson v. Richardson, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 857; 77 N.R. 1; 22 O.A.C. 1; 7 R.F.L.(3d) 304; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 699; 17 C.P.C.(2d) 104, refd to. [para. 20].

Caron v. Caron, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 892; 75 N.R. 36; 2 Y.R. 246; [1987] 4 W.W.R. 522; 7 R.F.L.(3d) 274; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 735; 14 B.C.L.R.(2d) 186, refd to. [para. 20].

Statutes Noticed:

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 3, sect. 15 [para. 27].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Payne, Julien D., Divorce (3rd Ed. 1993), p. 194, refd to. [para. 23].

Counsel:

Forest C. Hume, for the petitioner;

Barbara Hill Koberinski, representing herself.

This case was heard on February 7, 1995, before Smith, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Family Division, Judicial District of Moncton, who delivered the following judg­ment on February 24, 1995.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP