Neyedley Estate v. Neyedley Estate et al., 2004 SKQB 79

JudgeDawson, J.
CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
Case DateMarch 04, 2004
JurisdictionSaskatchewan
Citations2004 SKQB 79;(2004), 246 Sask.R. 178 (FD)

Neyedley Estate v. Neyedley Estate (2004), 246 Sask.R. 178 (FD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] Sask.R. TBEd. MR.060

Douglas Neyedley, one of the executors of the Last Will and Testament of Elizabeth Neyedley, deceased (petitioner) v. Joseph Jacob (Jackie) Neyedley, Douglas Neyedley and Robert Neyedley, as executors of the Last Will and Testament of Joseph Neyedley, deceased, and Jackie Neyedley and Donna Neyedley in their personal capacity (respondents)

(2003 F.L.D. No. 378; 2004 SKQB 79)

Indexed As: Neyedley Estate v. Neyedley Estate et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Family Law Division

Judicial Centre of Regina

Dawson, J.

March 4, 2004.

Summary:

The respondents applied to strike the petitioner's petition on the basis that it disclosed no cause of action.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, struck one of the claims. The court gave the petitioner 45 days to amend his petition respecting another claim.

Family Law - Topic 6665

Dependents' relief legislation - Entitlement - Time for determining whether claimant is a dependent or adequate provision made - Section 3 of the Dependants' Relief Act provided that "Where a person dies leaving a dependant or dependants, any dependant or person acting on behalf of a dependant may apply to the court for an order to provide reasonable maintenance for the dependant" - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, held that the provision created no vested interest in any dependant - It merely gave a dependant a right to apply for maintenance when reasonable provisions therefor were not made - It did not permit an original order being made for maintenance for a deceased dependant - See paragraphs 11 to 26.

Family Law - Topic 6753

Dependents' relief legislation - Practice - Time for application - [See Family Law - Topic 6665 ].

Cases Noticed:

Milgaard v. Kujawa et al. (1994), 123 Sask.R. 164; 74 W.A.C. 164; 118 D.L.R.(4th) 653 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Sagon v. Royal Bank of Canada et al. (1992), 105 Sask.R. 133; 32 W.A.C. 133 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

Balacko v. Eaton's of Canada Ltd. (1967), 60 W.W.R.(N.S.) 22 (Sask. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 8].

Smith Estate, In Re; Wetzel v. National Trust Company Ltd. (1956), 18 W.W.R. 556 (Sask. C.A.), folld. [para. 14].

McMaster Estate, Re (1957), 21 W.W.R. (N.S.) 603 (Alta. S.C.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Hafey et al., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 106; 57 N.R. 321; 67 N.S.R.(2d) 181; 16 D.L.R.(4th) 321, refd to. [para. 22].

Skoke-Graham et al. v. R. - see R. v. Hafey et al.

Thoreson v. Thoreson and Thoreson (1982), 17 Sask.R. 64 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

Statutes Noticed:

Dependants' Relief Act, S.S. 1996, c. D-25.01, sect. 3 [para. 20].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Côté, Pierre-André, The Interpretation of Legislation In Canada (3rd Ed. 2000), p. 104 [para. 23].

Counsel:

D. Tapp, for the petitioner;

T.G. Graf, Q.C., and T.R. Prince, for the respondents.

This application was heard by Dawson, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, Judicial Centre of Regina, who delivered the following decision on March 4, 2004.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Beckett v. Beckett Estate, 2011 SKQB 431
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • 17 Noviembre 2011
    ...v. National Trust Company Ltd. (1956), 18 W.W.R. 556 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 11]. Neyedley Estate v. Neyedley Estate et al. (2004), 246 Sask.R. 178; 2004 SKQB 79 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 11]. Donkin v. Bugoy - see Bugoy Estate v. Bugoy. Bugoy Estate v. Bugoy, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 85; 6......
  • Kalawarny v. Fife, 2016 MBQB 146
    • Canada
    • Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
    • 14 Julio 2016
    ...Co. Ltd. , [1956] 4 D.L.R. (2d) 171 (Sask. C.A.); Re McMaster , [1957] 10 D.L.R. (2d) 436 (Alta. S.C.) at para. 11; Neyedley v. Neyedley , 2004 SKQB 79, 246 Sask.R. 178 at paras. 12, 22 and 25). [91] The reasoning set out in the case law respecting maintenance claims by dependants is helpfu......
2 cases
  • Beckett v. Beckett Estate, 2011 SKQB 431
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • 17 Noviembre 2011
    ...v. National Trust Company Ltd. (1956), 18 W.W.R. 556 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 11]. Neyedley Estate v. Neyedley Estate et al. (2004), 246 Sask.R. 178; 2004 SKQB 79 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [para. 11]. Donkin v. Bugoy - see Bugoy Estate v. Bugoy. Bugoy Estate v. Bugoy, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 85; 6......
  • Kalawarny v. Fife, 2016 MBQB 146
    • Canada
    • Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
    • 14 Julio 2016
    ...Co. Ltd. , [1956] 4 D.L.R. (2d) 171 (Sask. C.A.); Re McMaster , [1957] 10 D.L.R. (2d) 436 (Alta. S.C.) at para. 11; Neyedley v. Neyedley , 2004 SKQB 79, 246 Sask.R. 178 at paras. 12, 22 and 25). [91] The reasoning set out in the case law respecting maintenance claims by dependants is helpfu......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT