Magee v. Magee, (1993) 111 Sask.R. 211 (QB)

• Judge: Grotsky, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: May 27, 1993
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1993), 111 Sask.R. 211 (QB)

Magee v. Magee (1993), 111 Sask.R. 211 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Marie Carol Magee (Now Marie Carole Maurice)(petitioner/respondent) v. Kim Evan Magee (respondent/applicant)

(1989 Q.B. (U.F.C.) No. 702)

Indexed As: Magee v. Magee

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Grotsky, J.

May 27, 1993.

Summary:

A noncustodial divorced father applied to vary an access order respecting his son.

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

Family Law - Topic 1940

Custody and access - Variation of custody and access rights - General - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench set out the principles applicable to applications to vary access orders - See paragraph 11.

Family Law - Topic 1947

Custody and access - Variation of custody and access rights - Changed circumstances - General - A divorced wife was awarded custody of their then four month old son - The father was granted access at the wife's home at times convenient to the wife - Four years later the father applied to vary the access order to give him regular un­supervised access - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appli­cation - The court held that the wife's conduct in unilaterally suspending access at times was not in the best interests of the child - Further, the wife's "deliberate nega­tive objective" in desiring to com­pletely remove the father from the child's life was a "change occurring since the making of the access order" which would further affect the child's best interests.

Family Law - Topic 1952

Custody and access - Variation of custody and access rights - Conduct necessary to support variation - [See Family Law - Topic 1947 ].

Cases Noticed:

H. v. J. (1992), 40 R.F.L.(3d) 90 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Wittal (Himmelspach) v. Himmelspach (1983), 27 Sask.R. 143; 36 R.F.L.(2d) 413 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 11].

Roode v. Roode (1985), 42 Sask.R. 307 (Q.B), refd to. [para. 11].

Talbot v. Henry (1990), 84 Sask.R. 170; 25 R.F.L.(3d) 415 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

Mitchell v. Mitchell (1988), 16 R.F.L.(3d) 462 (Sask. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 17].

Statutes Noticed:

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 3, sect. 16(4), sect. 16(8), sect. 16(10) [para. 4]; sect. 17(5) [para. 10].

Counsel:

R.D. Jackson, for the applicant;

A.S. Brent, for the respondent.

This application was heard before Grotsky, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following judgment on May 27, 1993.