Rauf v. Rauf, (1992) 56 O.A.C. 319 (DC)

• Judge: Hartt, Montgomery and McKeown, JJ.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: February 20, 1992
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1992), 56 O.A.C. 319 (DC)

Rauf v. Rauf (1992), 56 O.A.C. 319 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of an appeal from an action commenced in the District Court of Ontario, in the Judicial District of Waterloo, and bearing Action No. Misc. 81-86

(File No. 399/90)

Indexed As: Rauf v. Rauf

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

Hartt, Montgomery and McKeown, JJ.

March 3, 1992.

Summary:

Following the division of marital property, the wife appealed for a variation of the equalization payment on the ground the trial court erred in dealing with a vested pension plan.

The Ontario Divisional Court allowed the appeal.

Family Law - Topic 880.28

Husband and wife - Marital property - Distribution order - Pensions - The trial court failed to take the husband's pension plan into consideration when making the equalization calculation - Instead, "he pulled a figure of $2,000 a year for the ten years out of the air for the purpose of the wife buying a R.R.S.P." - The wife appealed for a variation - The Ontario Divisional Court allowed the appeal and impressed the pension with a trust on behalf of the wife to the extent of a one half interest - The retirement benefits should be shared equally on the basis of the total number of months of marriage during which pension contributions were made divided by the total number of months in which the husband contributed to the plan.

Cases Noticed:

Marsham v. Marsham (1987), 59 O.R.(2d) 609 (H.C.), apprvd. [para. 4].

Counsel:

Theresa McClenaghan, for the appellant;

David J. Lang, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on February 20, 1992, by Hartt, Montgomery and McKeown, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court. The court's decision was given orally by Montgomery, J., and released on March 3, 1992.