This is contrary to sections 20, 21(1)(c), 22(2)(b), 23(2)(b), 23(4), and 31 of the FMEA, which allows the court to either order that the debtor be imprisoned or issue a warrant for the arrest of the debtor for the purposes of bringing the debtor before the court. [...] We recommend that sections 165(d), (e), (f), and (g) be clarified to allow for exemption claims by or on behalf of dependants of the judgment debtor, and that special consideration be paid in reviewing the MJEA to the impact of the Act on property that is in regular use by dependants of the judgment debtor. [...] It appears that there is a potential for conflict between the entitlement of a judgment debtor’s spouse to an equal share of family property under the FLA and the application of the MJEA to property that is in issue in a proceeding under the FLA. [...] This conflict can occur when a debt of the judgment debtor that is not a family debt, or that is a family debt to be borne to a greater extent by the judgment debtor, can be satisfied under the proposed MJEA by seizure of family property to which the former spouse of the judgment debtor is, as a starting point, equally entitled. [...] We recommend an exemption be created with respect to property that is at issue in a family law matter, where the debt of the judgment debtor has been (a) incurred after the date of separation between the judgment debtor and the judgment debtor’s former spouse, (b) determined by court order not to be a family debt within the meaning of section 86 of the FLA, or (c) unequally divided between the par.
Authors
- Pages
- 8
- Published in
- Canada
