L.K. v. D.W.D.

L.K. v. D.W.D.

The appeal is allowed because the appellant, a self-represented litigant, was not given clear notice that the April 11 hearing would proceed as a summary trial culminating in final orders nor informed of the precise relief sought, and that lack of notice constituted a breach of procedural fairness that invalidated the orders and required setting them aside and remitting the matter for rehearing.

Citation
2024 YKCA 11
Parties
Respondent (plaintiff): L.K.; Appellant (defendant): D.W.D.
Court
Yukon Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law (custody, Access and Division of Assets) / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Supreme Court of Yukon Final Orders Following a Summary Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of the Supreme Court of Yukon set aside; matter remitted to the Supreme Court for a rehearing of the parties' applications.
Legal Topics
Summary Trial, Procedural Fairness, Notice, Self Represented Litigant, Custody and Access, Division of Family Property, Remittal for Rehearing
Source Language
English
Family Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Summary Trial Procedural Fairness Notice Self Represented Litigant Custody and Access +2 more

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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L.K.

Respondent (plaintiff)

D.W.D.

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Family Law (custody, Access and Division of Assets) / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Supreme Court of Yukon Final Orders Following a Summary Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant received adequate notice that the hearing would proceed as a summary trial
  2. 2 Whether failure to give notice and clarify the relief sought amounted to a breach of procedural fairness
  3. 3 Whether any breach of procedural fairness caused prejudice requiring setting aside the orders

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed because the appellant, a self-represented litigant, was not given clear notice that the April 11 hearing would proceed as a summary trial culminating in final orders nor informed of the precise relief sought, and that lack of notice constituted a breach of procedural fairness that invalidated the orders and required setting them aside and remitting the matter for rehearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of the Supreme Court of Yukon set aside; matter remitted to the Supreme Court for a rehearing of the parties' applications.

Orders

  • Order below set aside
  • Matter remitted to the Supreme Court of Yukon for rehearing of the parties' applications