Watson v. Watson

Watson v. Watson

The court held that neither party proved that equal division of the Wesley Road equity would be unfair under s.65 FRA and ordered equal division; fairness required equal division of Mr. Watson's public service pension including pre-marriage accrual due to the financial partnership and Ms. Watson's sacrifice; RSPs...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 BCSC 730
Parties
Claimant: Robert Craig Watson; Respondent: Stanislava Watson
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Family Law (property Division, Spousal and Child Support, Custody) / Trial Reasons for Judgment
Outcome
Judgment identifying, dividing and reapportioning family assets and resolving parenting, support and related monetary claims as set out below.
Legal Topics
Reapportionment Under S.65 FRA, Pension Division and PBDA Interaction, Compensatory Spousal Support, Joyce Model Guardianship, Division of Rsps, Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines Application, Section 7 Expenses
Source Language
english
Family Law Property Division Pensions Spousal Support Child Custody and Guardianship Child Support Reapportionment Under S.65 FRA Pension Division and PBDA Interaction +5 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Craig Watson

Claimant

Stanislava Watson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law (property Division, Spousal and Child Support, Custody) / Trial Reasons for Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Wesley Road equity should be reapportioned under s.65 FRA
  2. 2 Proper division of Mr. Watson's public service pension given pre-marriage accrual and PBDA
  3. 3 Division of Ms. Watson's and Mr. Watson's RSPs

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that neither party proved that equal division of the Wesley Road equity would be unfair under s.65 FRA and ordered equal division; fairness required equal division of Mr. Watson's public service pension including pre-marriage accrual due to the financial partnership and Ms. Watson's sacrifice; RSPs are family assets to be equalized; Ms. Watson met the test for compensatory spousal support but quantum should be modest and reviewable; custody is joint with guardianship under the Joyce Model giving Ms. Watson final decision-making subject to court intervention; child support set by Guidelines and s.7 expenses shared 54/46.

Court Disposition

Judgment identifying, dividing and reapportioning family assets and resolving parenting, support and related monetary claims as set out below.

Orders

  • Unregistered Manulife investment ($18,912), RESP in Mr. Watson's name ($6,455) and Coast Capital account in trust for Hanna ($3,124) to be held in trust for the children; no withdrawals without written consent of other party
  • Boat, motor and trailer to be jointly owned and shared; costs of insurance and maintenance shared equally; 30 days' notice and buyout/ appraisal/sale procedure if one party withdraws