Newson v. Newson, (1993) 25 B.C.A.C. 24 (CA)

• Judge: Gibbs, Hinds and Goldie, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: March 02, 1993
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (1993), 25 B.C.A.C. 24 (CA);1993 CanLII 316 (BC CA);78 BCLR (2d) 35;45 RFL (3d) 115;25 BCAC 24;[1993] BCJ No 438 (QL)

Newson v. Newson (1993), 25 B.C.A.C. 24 (CA);

    43 W.A.C. 24

MLB headnote and full text

Catherine Paulette Gisele Newson (appellant/plaintiff) v. Ronald Edward Newson, Maison Furniture Rentals Ltd., and Quintet Enterprises Ltd. (respondents/defendants)

(CA012577)

Indexed As: Newson v. Newson

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Gibbs, Hinds and Goldie, JJ.A.

March 2, 1993.

Summary:

A wife petitioned for divorce and mainte­nance, and applied under the Family Rela­tions Act for determination and division of family assets.

The trial judge granted the divorce but refused the claim for permanent mainte­nance, determined and apportioned the family assets between the parties. The wife appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, varying the order of the trial judge.

Family Law - Topic 875

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Statutes requiring equal division - Exceptions - 45 year old wife and 55 year old husband cohabited five years before their nine year marriage - Separated two years - Wife brought no significant assets into the relationship, whereas husband, now retired, had sub­stantial means - Wife did not work during marriage, now unemployed with limited skills or experience - No family assets acquired through inheritance or gift - Wife received $600-$1200 monthly from France, owned $254,000 worth of French property - The British Columbia Court of Appeal divided the family assets unequally.

Family Law - Topic 880

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution orders - Contribution to busi­ness asset - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that "where a spouse has an interest in the shares in a company which carries on one or more businesses to which the other spouse has made a direct or indirect contribution thus establishing a claim of a family asset then, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, the value of the interest in the shares in the company, rather than the value of the business of the company to which the other spouse has made a direct or indirect contribution, should be held to constitute a family asset. Judicial reapportionment under s. 51 of the [Family Relations] Act would be available to correct any unfairness resulting there­from" - See paragraphs 28, 30 to 32.

Family Law - Topic 4010

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Periodic payments - 45 year old wife and 55 year old husband cohabited five years before their nine year marriage - Separated two years - Wife brought no significant assets into the relationship, whereas husband, now retired, had sub­stantial means - Wife did not work during marriage, now unemployed with limited skills or experience - No family assets acquired through inheritance or gift - Wife received $600-$1200 monthly from France, owned $254,000 worth of French property, and would receive $814,000 on a division of family assets - The British Columbia Court of Appeal affirmed that no permanent periodic maintenance should be ordered for the wife, that she would be economically self-sufficient - See para­graphs 54 to 76.

Family Law - Topic 4022.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - To wife - Extent of obligation - [See Family Law - Topic 4010 ].

Cases Noticed:

Capozzi v. Capozzi (1982), 30 R.F.L.(2d) 145; 40 B.C.L.R. 92 (S.C), varied 53 B.C.L.R. 232; 39 R.F.L.(2d) 340 (C.A.), consd. [para. 25].

Noble v. Noble (1986), 2 B.C.L.R.(2d) 23; 1 R.F.L.(3d) 207 (C.A.), consd. [para. 27].

Piercy v. Piercy (1991), 31 R.F.L.(3d) 187 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

Piskor v. Piskor (1981), 27 B.C.L.R. 230; 22 R.F.L.(2d) 257 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 39].

Maw v. Maw (1985), 44 R.F.L.(2d) 364 (B.C.S.C.), consd. [para. 60].

Rednall v. Rednall (1986), 4 R.F.L.(3d) 337 (B.C.S.C.), consd. [para. 60].

Storey v. Storey (1988), 23 R.F.L.(3d) 225 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 60].

Moge v. Moge (1992), 145 N.R. 1; 81 Man.R.(2d) 161; 30 W.A.C. 161 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 60].

Pelech v. Pelech, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 801; [1987] 4 W.W.R. 481; 76 N.R. 81; 7 R.F.L.(3d) 225; 14 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 641, dist. [para. 67].

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, dist. [para. 67].

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, dist. [para. 67].

Statutes Noticed:

Court of Appeal Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 7, sect. 9(1) [para. 33].

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985 (2d Supp.), c. 3, sect. 15 [paras. 57, 59]; sect. 15(2), sect. 15(5) [para. 58]; sect. 15(7) [paras. 58, 66, 70-71, 76].

Family Relations Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 121, sect. 43 [para. 34]; sect. 51 [paras. 22, 28, 34, 38]; sect. 52 [paras. 22, 45, 53]; sect. 57 [paras. 54, 76].

Counsel:

D.R. Martin, for the appellant;

P.R. Albi and J.M. Sullivan, for the re­spondents.

This appeal was heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on January 11 and 12, 1993, before Gibbs, Hinds and Goldie, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered by Hinds, J.A., on March 2, 1993.