Thatcher v. Thatcher, (1980) 2 Sask.R. 290 (CA)

• Judge: Culliton, C.J.S., Hall and Bayda, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: April 07, 1980
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1980), 2 Sask.R. 290 (CA)

Thatcher v. Thatcher (1980), 2 Sask.R. 290 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Thatcher v. Thatcher

(No. 7259)

Indexed As: Thatcher v. Thatcher

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Culliton, C.J.S., Hall and Bayda, JJ.A.

April 7, 1980.

Summary:

This case arose out of an application by a mother for custody of her three children. The children were aged 14, 10 and 5. The trial judge granted custody of the 14 year old boy to the father and custody of the girls aged 5 and 10 to the mother. The judgment of the trial judge is reported at 1 Sask.R. 187. The father appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Family Law - Topic 1881

Custody of children - Considerations in awarding custody - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal referred to the principle that in awarding custody the paramount consideration is the welfare of the infant - See paragraphs 9 and 10.

Family Law - Topic 2142

Custody of children - Evidence - Child as a witness in court - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that a trial judge has a discretion in a custody hearing to determine whether or not to hear an infant child as a witness - The Court of Appeal stated that an infant should give evidence at a custody hearing only in "the most exceptional circumstances" - See paragraphs 15 and 16.

Family Law - Topic 1888

Custody of children - Considerations in awarding custody - Separation of siblings - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that while it is desirable to keep the children of a family together, it is only one factor to be considered in determining the best interest of a child - See paragraph 20.

Family Law - Topic 1910

Custody of children - Appeals - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that the question of the custody of an infant is a matter which peculiarly lies within the jurisdiction of the trial judge and an appeal court should not interfere unless the trial judge has clearly acted on a wrong principle or disregarded some material evidence - See paragraph 26.

Cases Noticed:

McKee v. McKee, [1950] S.C.R. 700, refd to. [para. 10].

Stevenson v. Florant, [1925] 4 D.L.R. 530 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

Zinck v. Zinck (1973), 6 N.S.R.(2d) 622; 14 R.F.L. 106, refd to. [para. 20].

Adams et al. v. MacLeod et al., 20 N.R. 203; [1978] 2 S.C.R. 621, refd to. [para. 26].

Farden v. Farden (1973), 8 R.F.L. 183, refd to. [para. 27].

Francis v. Francis (1973), 8 R.F.L. 209, refd to. [para. 27].

Archer v. Archer (1979), 1 Sask.R. 3, refd to. [para. 27].

Statutes Noticed:

Infants Act, R.S.S. Supplement 1978, c. 32, sect. 3 [para. 8].

Authors and Works Noticed:

da Costa, Studies in Canadian Family Law (1972), page 603 [para. 15].

Counsel:

E.F. Anthony Merchant, for the appellant, husband;

G.L. Gerrand, Q.C., for the respondent, wife;

R.L. Barclay, Q.C., for Gregory Ross Thatcher.

This appeal was heard by CULLITON, C.J.S., HALL and BAYDA, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by CULLITON, C.J.S., at Regina, Saskatchewan, on April 7, 1980.