Mraovic v. Mraovic, (2003) 179 Man.R.(2d) 251 (QB)

• Judge: McCawley, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: December 17, 2003
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2003), 179 Man.R.(2d) 251 (QB);2003 MBQB 284

Mraovic v. Mraovic (2003), 179 Man.R.(2d) 251 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. JA.006

Shannon Roelene Mraovic (petitioner) v. Daniel Larry Mraovic (respondent)

(FD 01-01-64475; 2003 MBQB 284)

Indexed As: Mraovic v. Mraovic

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

McCawley, J.

December 17, 2003.

Summary:

A wife petitioned for divorce. The issues were the validity of a separation agreement, child support, spousal support and the division of marital property.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench determined the issues and ordered accordingly.

Family Law - Topic 3386

Separation agreements - Grounds for setting aside - Unconscionable bargain - The parties met in 1992, married in 1995 and separated in October 2000 - The wife left the marital home with the children - The husband retained a lawyer to draft a separation agreement soon after - He had been overbearing, dominant and abusive during the marriage - The wife was submissive and was on medication for depression and anxiety - She signed the agreement a month after the separation - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench set aside the agreement - The parties were in an unequal position - The wife, through ignorance, need and distress, was pressured into signing an agreement which was patently unfair and favoured the husband, who was in the much stronger position - He created the inequality of position, in part, through fear and deceit - The unconscionable agreement was executed under duress - See paragraphs 19 to 35.

Family Law - Topic 3388

Separation agreements - Grounds for setting aside - Duress or undue influence - [See Family Law - Topic 3386 ].

Family Law - Topic 3392

Separation agreements - Grounds for setting aside - Inequality of bargaining power - [See Family Law - Topic 3386 ].

Family Law - Topic 4045.5

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Support guidelines - Calculation or attribution of income - A wife petitioned for divorce - There were three children - The husband had several businesses - He went through a bankruptcy - At the time of separation, he was a salaried employee earning $45,000 - He lost that employment and started another business - He argued that the court should determine his income to be $26,000 based on the previous three years income tax returns - He maintained a lifestyle beyond that indicated by his stated income - He ran personal expenses through his companies - He had been engaged in "small-time wheeling and dealing" in property - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench imputed his annual income to be $45,000 for child support purposes - He had diverted income to reduce the level of child support he would otherwise be obligated to pay and had unreasonably deducted expenses from income - See paragraphs 36 to 50.

Family Law - Topic 4045.10

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Support guidelines - Persons obligated to support children - In loco parentis - A mother petitioned for divorce - She sought child support for three children - One child was from the mother's prior relationship - The child, now aged 14, was three when the parties began a relationship - The child had always called the father "dad" - The father had claimed the child as a dependent in his income tax returns - The father had little contact with the child since separation - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench held that the father had treated the child as his own son and supported him - He stood in loco parentis to the child and was obliged to pay child support - At this stage, it was unrealistic to expect the mother to look to the child's biological father for support - See paragraphs 51 to 58.

Cases Noticed:

Lindsay v. Lindsay (1989), 59 Man.R.(2d) 186 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 31].

Morrison v. Coast Finance Ltd. (1965), 54 W.W.R. 257, refd to. [para. 32].

Deimuth v. Fortin (2003), 171 Man.R.(2d) 143 (Q.B.F.D.), refd to. [para. 57].

Chartier v. Chartier, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 242; 235 N.R. 1; 134 Man.R.(2d) 19; 193 W.A.C. 19, refd to. [para. 57].

L.M.M. v. W.G.B. (2003), 170 Man.R.(2d) 182; 285 W.A.C. 182 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

Counsel:

Lynda L. Grimes, for the petitioner;

Kerry L. UnRuh, for the respondent.

This matter was heard before McCawley, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the following judgment on December 17, 2003.