Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

                          IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

                          Citation: MacLean v. MacLean, 2005 NSSC 284

 

                                                                                                     Date: 20051031

                                                                                             Docket: 1205-002054

                                                                                                    Registry: Pictou

 

Between:

 

 

                                            Alfred Thomas MacLean

                                                                                                              Petitioner

                                                             v.

 

                                             Anne Cheryl MacLean

                                                                                                           Respondent

 

LIBRARY HEADING

 

Judge:                  The Honourable Justice Donald M. Hall

 

Heard:                  October 3, 2005, in Pictou, Nova Scotia

 

Subject:                Unequal division of wife's pre-marriage pension and unequal division of matrimonial home.

 

Summary:            Prior to marriage wife lived and worked in U.K. where she built up a substantial pension fund.  After moving to Nova Scotia and marrying petitioner the parties constructed the matrimonial home on land previously owned by the husband.  In addition, the husband contributed a substantial sum of money from his pre-marriage pension plan and other savings to construction of the home.

 

Result:                  Considering relative contributions made to acquisition of the assets in question, unequal divisions ordered:  wife to have entire interest in her pension plan and unequal division of matrimonial home ordered.

 

 

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

 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.