Thomson v. Thomson, (1988) 69 Sask.R. 62 (CA)

• Judge: Cameron, Vancise and Gerwing, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: May 26, 1988
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1988), 69 Sask.R. 62 (CA);1988 CanLII 5215 (SK CA);52 DLR (4th) 221;14 RFL (3d) 347;69 Sask R 62

Thomson v. Thomson (1988), 69 Sask.R. 62 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Irene Anne Thomson (applicant) v. Walter Alexander Thomson (respondent)

(No. 9537)

Indexed As: Thomson v. Thomson

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Cameron, Vancise and Gerwing, JJ.A.

May 26, 1988.

Summary:

A husband and wife divorced after 15 years of marriage. By agreement, the wife had custody of the two children and the husband paid child support. A year after the divorce, the wife applied to increase child support. The chambers judge, in a decision unreported in this series of reports, held that adequate provision had not been made for the maintenance of the children but denied an increase in the absence of sufficiently altered circumstances since the decree nisi. The wife appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.

Family Law - Topic 4006.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Children - Effect of agreements - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that the provisions of a separation agreement between spouses concerning child support were not binding on the children - The court stated that children had the right to support from each parent, according to ability - The court held that child support should be varied where no longer adequate - See paragraphs 27 to 37 and 61 to 64.

Family Law - Topic 4006.1

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Children - Effect of agreements - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that the court must scrutinize separation agreements and, where there is inadequate provision for the maintenance of children, the court must disregard the agreement - The court stated that, although a substantial change in circumstances is necessary before the court will vary spousal support, that is not a requirement in the case of children - See paragraphs 15 to 38 and 54.

Family Law - Topic 4017

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Variation of - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, on an application to vary child support, examined the needs of the children and the change in circumstances from the date of the separation agreement - The court must look at change in circumstances from the time of the last weighing and assessing of the provision for the children - See paragraphs 43 to 47.

Family Law - Topic 4019

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance awards - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Appeal courts - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed the powers of the appeal court - Section 17(2) of the Divorce Act sets out the remedial powers of the reviewing court - The Pelech case in settling the dispute concerning the powers of the appeal court stated that an appeal court may, as an alternative to ordering a new trial, correct the trial judge's erroneous decision - See paragraphs 40 to 42.

Cases Noticed:

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. 145; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 641, consd. [para. 1].

Caron v. Caron, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 892; 75 N.R. 36; 7 R.F.L.(3d) 274; 2 Y.R. 246; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 735, consd. [para. 11].

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, consd. [paras. 11, 62].

Paras v. Paras, [1971] 1 O.R. 130; 2 R.F.L. 328; 14 D.L.R.(3d) 546 (C.A.), consd. [para. 17].

Giles v. Giles and Wood (1980), 15 R.F.L.(2d) 286 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

Hyman v. Hyman, [1929] A.C. 601 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 19].

Messier v. Delage, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 401; 50 N.R. 16; 35 R.F.L.(2d) 337, refd to. [para. 19].

Farquar v. Farquar (1983), 1 D.L.R.(4th) 244; 43 O.R.(2d) 423; 35 R.F.L.(2d) 287; [1983] W.D.F.L. case &1205, refd to. [para. 21].

Webb v. Webb (1984), 5 O.A.C. 161; 10 D.L.R.(4th) 74; 46 O.R.(2d) 457; 39 R.F.L.(2d) 113 (C.A.), consd. [para. 21].

Jull v. Jull (1984), 56 A.R. 123; 42 R.F.L.(2d) 113 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Binns v. Binns (1985), 69 N.S.R.(2d) 205; 163 A.P.R. 205; 45 R.F.L.(2d) 369 (F.C.), refd to. [para. 24].

Hansford v. Hansford et al., [1973] 1 O.R. 116; 9 R.F.L. 233 (S.C.), consd. [para. 26].

MacKenzie v. MacKenzie et al. (1975), 25 R.F.L. 354, consd. [para. 28].

Krueger v. Taubner (1974), 17 R.F.L. 86 (Man. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 31].

Malcovitch v. Malcovitch (1978), 21 O.R.(2d) 449 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 31].

Kravetsky v. Kravetsky (1975), 21 R.F.L. 211 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

Dal Santo v. Dal Santo (1975), 21 R.F.L. 117 (B.C.S.C.), consd. [para. 32].

Schmeiser v. Schmeiser (1982), 21 Sask.R. 437; 32 R.F.L.(2d) 449 (C.A.), consd. [para. 33].

Silverman v. Silverman (1987), 79 N.S.R.(2d) 282; 196 A.P.R. 282; 7 R.F.L.(3d) 292 (C.A.), consd. [para. 36].

Harrington v. Harrington (1981), 33 O.R.(2d) 150 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40].

Wilbur v. Wilbur (1983), 41 O.R.(2d) 565, refd to. [para. 42].

Statutes Noticed:

Court of Appeal Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. C-42, sect. 8 [para. 40].

Divorce Act, S.C. 1986, c. 4, sect. 11(b) [para. 45]; sect. 15 [paras. 36, 57]; sect. 15(5) [paras. 15, 18, 57]; sect. 15(8) [paras. 15, 18]; sect. 17 [para. 64]; sect. 17(4) [paras. 1, 10, 39, 46, 52, 56, 59]; sect. 17(8) [paras. 16, 18, 59]; sect. 21(5) [paras. 40, 47].

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. D-8, sect. 9 [para. 44]; sect. 11 [paras. 7, 18, 20, 30].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Wilson, J., "The Variation of Support Orders", Family Law: Dimensions of Justice (1983), R.S. Abella and C. L'Heureux-Dubé (Eds.) [para. 26].

Counsel:

F. Zinkhan, for the appellant;

G. Vogeli, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Cameron, Vancise and Gerwing, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. The decision of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal was delivered on May 26, 1988, when the following decisions were filed:

Vancise, J.A. - see paragraphs 1 to 55.

Cameron, J.A. (Gerwing, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 56 to 65