The appellant husband appealed a final spousal support order, arguing a lack of procedural fairness.
The Divisional Court found that the lower court judge, who had presided over a settlement conference, erred by deciding the substantive issue without clear consent from both parties.
Furthermore, the unrepresented husband was prejudiced by the late service of the respondent's factum and affidavit on the morning of the hearing.
The appeal was allowed, the support order was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Family Court for a new hearing before a different judge.
