M.H. Tweyman

The applicant sought to sever the divorce from corollary relief, allowing it to proceed uncontested.

The respondent opposed, arguing potential legal disadvantage if the applicant died intestate, and brought a cross-motion for extensive financial disclosure.

The court granted the severance, finding no legal disadvantage to the respondent, as claims under the Family Law Act and Succession Law Reform Act could continue, and the respondent's argument was speculative.

The court also found that reasonable arrangements for child support had been made.

Regarding disclosure, the court granted a more proportionate disclosure order, limiting the scope of the respondent's extensive request.

The respondent, the deceased's separated spouse, brought a motion for payment of support arrears and ongoing interim support from the deceased's estate.

The applicant, the deceased's new partner, conceded entitlement to support under the Succession Law Reform Act but argued for equal treatment among dependants and challenged the court's jurisdiction to enforce the arrears.

The court held it lacked jurisdiction to enforce the arrears because the support order remained filed with the Family Responsibility Office, which has exclusive enforcement authority.

However, the court granted interim support under the Succession Law Reform Act, awarding a $35,000 lump sum and $3,500 monthly, balancing the finite resources of the estate among the multiple dependants.