Canada Case Law

Pasquill v. British Columbia Securities Commission

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Payments made from the appellant's LIF accounts are neither "money transferred under Division 7" nor "benefits" as defined in the PBSA; therefore s.70(1) does not exempt those payments from attachment and the chambers judge correctly ordered forfeiture; the chambers judge also correctly declined to appoint a receiver because the forfeiture order was sufficient to secure payments and the receiver powers sought exceeded the authority to attach payments.

Source excerpt

• Forfeiture
• Attachment and exemption
• Receiver appointment
• Statutory interpretation
• Life income fund (lif)

Read case analysis

Pasquill v. British Columbia (Securities Commission)

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held a Securities Act preservation order against a life income fund was beyond the Commission's authority because the pension protections prevailed.

• Preservation orders
• Registered plans and rrif/lif protection
• Court order enforcement act s.71.3
• Pension benefits standards act s.70
• Conflict of statutes
• Specific vs general interpretation

Read case analysis

Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Freedom Nova Scotia

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

On clear, convincing and non‑speculative affidavit and expert evidence the court found a high probability and imminent risk that planned in‑person rallies would cause irreparable COVID‑19 spread and that damages were inadequate; the balance of convenience and public interest favored maintaining public health orders, therefore a quia timet ex parte injunction was granted enjoining organization, promotion and attendance at illegal public gatherings and authorizing law enforcement to enforce the order.

Source excerpt

• Quia timet injunction
• Public health orders
• Mask mandates
• Freedom of assembly and expression
• Balance of convenience
• Police enforcement of court orders

Read case analysis

Shih v. Shih

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court assessed special costs in a family law enforcement dispute and fixed the claimant’s recoverable special costs at $38,000, rather than the full billed amount.

• Special costs
• Contempt of court
• Garnishment
• Costs assessment
• Service of process
• Appeal

Read case analysis

Armoyan v. Armoyan

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the Florida order was clear, that respondent had actual knowledge, and that he intentionally failed to pay ordered child and spousal support; no discretionary or procedural reason justified withholding a contempt finding; prior Director enforcement and prior Florida contempt or contempt-related proceedings did not bar a Nova Scotia contempt finding; accordingly a declaration of contempt was entered and a penalty/purging hearing was scheduled with directions to pay arrears and take immediate steps to purge contempt.

Source excerpt

• Spousal support
• Child support
• Registration of foreign judgment
• Maintenance enforcement
• Contempt of court
• Double jeopardy / kienapple and s.11(h)

Read case analysis

Director of Civil Forfeiture v. E.J.B.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the defendants had been properly served in a civil forfeiture action and granted default judgment, allowing all relief sought in Part 1 of the application.

• Service of process
• Default judgment
• Forfeiture of property
• Application for relief
• Civil-forfeiture
• Default-judgment

Read case analysis

Atwal (Re)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that a bankrupt could not claim the $5,000 motor vehicle exemption for a vehicle valued at $5,800, and confirmed the trustee’s decision.

• Motor vehicle exemption
• Exemption from seizure
• Distribution of sale proceeds
• Trustee duties
• Bankruptcy
• Motor-vehicle-exemption

Read case analysis

Wildman v. Wildman

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

In family cases courts may pierce the corporate veil and impose security/charges against closely held corporate entities where the spouse wholly controls the entities, uses them as an alter ego to divert funds and thereby frustrates support obligations (applying Arsenault three‑factor test); the trial judge's charging order against the appellant's companies was justified; costs can be enforceable as support under FRSEA s.1(1)(g) but prejudgment interest awarded solely in relation to equalization cannot be made enforceable as spousal support.

Source excerpt

• Spousal support
• Child support
• Corporate veil
• Costs
• Prejudgment interest
• Equalization

Read case analysis

Stones v. Stones

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal upheld a retroactive reduction in spousal support, finding a material change in circumstances due to prolonged unemployment and no basis to disturb the interest ruling.

• Spousal support
• Variation of support
• Material change in circumstances
• Enforcement of maintenance
• Interest on arrears
• Reciprocal enforcement

Read case analysis

Canada (Minister of National Revenue) v. Whitfield

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court allowed the Crown’s two bills of costs after motions in an income tax enforcement matter, finding the amounts reasonable under the Rules.

• Costs assessment
• Seizure
• Reconsideration
• Federal court rules
• Costs-assessment
• Tax-enforcement

Read case analysis