The respondent moved to quash an appeal from an order dismissing a rule 21.01(1)(b) motion to strike a same-sex former partner's spousal support claim.
The underlying action involved a support claim advanced after a long same-sex relationship ended before the legislative amendment to s. 29 of the Family Law Act extending spousal support rights to same-sex couples.
The Court of Appeal held that an order dismissing a motion to strike for failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action is interlocutory, regardless of the forcefulness of the motion judge's reasons, because the substantive rights remain to be determined at trial.
The appeal therefore lay to the Divisional Court with leave, not to the Court of Appeal, and was quashed with costs.
