Vanston v. Scott, 2014 SKQB 64

• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Judge: Dufour, J.
• Citation: 2014 SKQB 64,(2014), 439 Sask.R. 236 (QB)
• Date: 03 March 2014

Vanston v. Scott (2014), 439 Sask.R. 236 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] Sask.R. TBEd. AP.031

Deborah Vanston (plaintiff) v. Ryan Montague Scott (defendant)

(2012 Q.B.S. No. 675; 2014 SKQB 64)

Indexed As: Vanston v. Scott

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Dufour, J.

March 3, 2014.

Summary:

A chambers application resulted in the following order: " ... there shall be a trial of the issue in the Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan regarding the domicile of Dr. Scott as of the date of his death." The answer would determine which jurisdiction's laws would govern the dispute. The plaintiff argued that Dr. Scott's domicile was Saskatchewan and that he had not abandoned it. The defendant argued that Dr. Scott had abandoned Saskatchewan in favour of British Columbia, his domicile of choice.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench determined that Dr. Scott's domicile as at the date of his death was his domicile of origin, Alberta, where he was born. The Court found that Dr. Scott abandoned Saskatoon as his domicile of choice, and that he did not acquire British Columbia as his domicile of choice. The result, on the law and the evidence was that Dr. Scott was domiciled in Alberta as of the date of his death.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 243

Domicile - Change of domicile - Domicile of origin - A chambers application resulted in the following order: " ... there shall be a trial of the issue in the Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan regarding the domicile of Dr. Scott as of the date of his death." - The answer would determine which jurisdiction's laws would govern the dispute - The plaintiff argued that Dr. Scott's domicile was Saskatchewan and that he had not abandoned it - The defendant argued that Dr. Scott had abandoned Saskatchewan in favour of British Columbia, his domicile of choice - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench determined that Dr. Scott's domicile at the date of his death was his domicile of origin, Alberta, where he was born - Dr. Scott abandoned Saskatoon, in fact, when he put his condo up for sale, emptied it and left for Kelowna, British Columbia, at the end of July in 2012 - Nor did he intend to reside there indefinitely - Dr. Scott did not acquire British Columbia as his domicile of choice - The acquisition of a domicile of choice involved two factors: the acquisition of a residence in fact in a new place and the intention of living there indefinitely - The first part of the test was met by Dr. Scott leasing a home in Kelowna - However, the Court found that Dr. Scott intended Kelowna to be nothing more than a stopover, a temporary place to spend time with family and friends until he could find a job in Central America - See paragraphs 22 to 44.

Conflict of Laws - Topic 244

Domicile - Change of domicile - Domicile of choice - [See Conflict of Laws - Topic 243 ].

Cases Noticed:

Wadsworth v. McCord (1886), 12 S.C.R. 466, refd to. [para. 20].

Trottier v. Rajotte, [1940] S.C.R. 203; [1940] 1 D.L.R. 433, refd to. [para. 20].

Osvath-Latkoczy v. Osvath-Latkoczy, [1959] S.C.R. 751; 19 D.L.R.(2d) 495, refd to. [para. 20].

Udny v. Udny (1869), L.R. 1 Sc. & Div. 441, refd to. [para. 20].

Lauderdale Peerage Case (1885), 10 App. Cas. 692, refd to. [para. 20].

Winans v. Attorney General, [1904] A.C. 287, refd to. [para. 20].

Lamond v. Lamond, [1948] 1 W.W.R. 1087 (Sask. K.B.), refd to. [para. 20].

Gunn v. Gunn (1956), 2 D.L.R.(2d) 351; 18 W.W.R.(N.S.) 85 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Patterson v. Patterson (1956), 3 D.L.R.(2d) 266 (N.S. Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 20].

Foote Estate, Re, [2011] 6 W.W.R. 453; 493 A.R. 354; 502 W.A.C. 354; 2011 ABCA 1, refd to. [para. 20].

Zhu v. Li, [2007] B.C.T.C. Uned. G43; 2007 BCSC 1467, refd to. [para. 41].

Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan (2013), 414 Sask.R. 70; 575 W.A.C. 70; 361 D.L.R.(4th) 132; 2013 SKCA 43, refd to. [para. 44].

Counsel:

Henry R. Kloppenburg, Q.C., for the plaintiff;

Jordan P. Hardy, for the defendant.

This trial was heard before Dufour, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following judgment and reasons for judgment, dated March 3, 2014.