L.K.S. v. S.D.B.

L.K.S. v. S.D.B.

The application is dismissed because the claimant failed to demonstrate that an advance was required to mount a challenge and failed to show the advance would not jeopardize the respondent's interests; the evidence was insufficient as to entitlement, the basis for the requested $40,000 and a detailed...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2020 BCSC 1364
Parties
Claimant: L.K.S.; Respondent: S.D.B.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Family Law / Application for Interim Distribution Under S.89 of the Family Law Act
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Interim Distribution, Spousal Support, Family Property, Excluded Property, Costs, Evidence Sufficiency
Source Language
english
Family Law Civil Procedure Property Law Interim Distribution Spousal Support Family Property Excluded Property Costs +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L.K.S.

Claimant

S.D.B.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law / Application for Interim Distribution Under S.89 of the Family Law Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim distribution under s.89 FLA should be granted to fund dispute resolution and litigation
  2. 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated a need for funds to mount her claim
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has shown the distribution would not be harmful to the respondent's interests

Ratio Decidendi

The application is dismissed because the claimant failed to demonstrate that an advance was required to mount a challenge and failed to show the advance would not jeopardize the respondent's interests; the evidence was insufficient as to entitlement, the basis for the requested $40,000 and a detailed budget/timeline, so the court could not reasonably conclude the s.89 criteria were met.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs in the cause; application may be revisited if supported by satisfactory evidence