M.P. v. G.M.

M.P. v. G.M.

The court holds that the PSA does not require proof of a Divorce Act style 'living separate and apart' or a one‑year separation period before a spousal support claim may proceed; if separation must be established, it includes 'separation by necessity' where spouses live separately for reasons beyond their control and neither intends to end the spousal relationship. Therefore the court has jurisdiction to hear the applicant's PSA spousal support claim and the matter is remitted for further proceedings.

Citation
2018 NSFC 13
Parties
Applicant: M.P.; Respondent: G.M.
Court
Nova Scotia Family Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Spousal Support Application Under the Parenting and Support Act / Preliminary Jurisdictional Decision (whether PSA Applies and Definition of Separation)
Outcome
Court finds it has jurisdiction under the PSA to hear the applicant's claim for spousal support and that separation by necessity qualifies; matter remitted for further proceedings.
Legal Topics
Separation, Separation by Necessity, Parenting and Support Act, Divorce Act Comparison, Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Family Law Spousal Support Statutory Interpretation Separation Separation by Necessity Parenting and Support Act Divorce Act Comparison Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.P.

Applicant

G.M.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Spousal Support Application Under the Parenting and Support Act / Preliminary Jurisdictional Decision (whether PSA Applies and Definition of Separation)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an applicant must be separated to bring a spousal support claim under the PSA
  2. 2 If separation is required, what constitutes separation under the PSA
  3. 3 Whether the Divorce Act requirement of 'living separate and apart' and a one‑year period applies to the PSA

Ratio Decidendi

The court holds that the PSA does not require proof of a Divorce Act style 'living separate and apart' or a one‑year separation period before a spousal support claim may proceed; if separation must be established, it includes 'separation by necessity' where spouses live separately for reasons beyond their control and neither intends to end the spousal relationship. Therefore the court has jurisdiction to hear the applicant's PSA spousal support claim and the matter is remitted for further proceedings.

Court Disposition

Court finds it has jurisdiction under the PSA to hear the applicant's claim for spousal support and that separation by necessity qualifies; matter remitted for further proceedings.

Orders

  • Court finds applicant may proceed under the Parenting and Support Act; jurisdiction established.
  • Docket appearance to be scheduled for directions on how the matter will proceed further.