Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

 

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

(FAMILY DIVISION)

Citation: Shurson v. Burgess, 2011 NSSC 344

 

Date: 20111017

Docket: SFHMCA 040843

Registry: Halifax

Between:

Allan Michael Shurson

Applicant

v.

 

Laurie Anne Burgess

Respondent

 

LIBRARY HEADING

\

Revised library sheet:            The text of the library sheet has been corrected according to the erratum dated November 9, 2011. The text of the erratum is appended to this library sheet.

 

Judge:             The Honourable Associate Chief Justice Lawrence I. O’Neil

 

Submissions:  Written Submission on costs were received to June 30, 2011

 

Related decision:       April 27, 2011                        

 

Issues:                        Variation of Spousal Support Order

 

Keywords:                  Costs

 

Legislation:                Rule 77 - Costs

 

Summary:                   The application was for a reduction/elimination of spousal support.  The Applicant became unemployed while the Court was still hearing evidence.  Spousal support was reduced to a nominal amount of $1.00 per month.

 

The court ordered each party to pay their own costs following a four day hearing.                                   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 

 

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

(FAMILY DIVISION)

Citation: Shurson v. Burgess, 2011 NSSC 344

 

Date: 20111017

Docket: SFHMCA 040843

Registry: Halifax

 

 

 

Between:

Allan Michael Shurson

Applicant

and

 

Laurie Anne Burgess

Respondent

 

 

 

 

Revised Decision:  The text of the original decision has been corrected according to the appended erratum dated November 9, 2011

 

Judge:                            The Honourable Associate Chief Justice Lawrence I. O’Neil

 

Heard:                            Written Submissions on costs were received to June 30, 2011


 

Counsel:                         William Leahey, for the Applicant        

Sally Faught, for the Respondent

 

Erratum:

 

Library Sheet, where it reads “Written Decision”, it should read “Related Decision”.

Decision, page 1, where it reads “Decision: April 27, 2011”, it should read “Related Decision: April 27, 2011”.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.