7,381
edits
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 387: | Line 387: | ||
The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' provides two tests to help the court decide when an agreement on property and debt should be set aside. Under the first test, at s. 93(3), the court must look at the situation of the parties when they were negotiating and executing the agreement. The court is required to consider whether these circumstances existed when the parties were making their agreement: | The ''[[Family Law Act]]'' provides two tests to help the court decide when an agreement on property and debt should be set aside. Under the first test, at s. 93(3), the court must look at the situation of the parties when they were negotiating and executing the agreement. The court is required to consider whether these circumstances existed when the parties were making their agreement: | ||
<blockquote><tt>(a) a spouse failed to disclose | <blockquote><tt>(a) a spouse failed to disclose significant property or debts, or other information relevant to the negotiation of the agreement;</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>(b) a spouse took improper advantage of the other spouse's vulnerability, including the other party's ignorance, need or distress;</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>(b) a spouse took improper advantage of the other spouse's vulnerability, including the other party's ignorance, need or distress;</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>(c) a spouse did not understand the nature or consequences of the agreement;</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>(c) a spouse did not understand the nature or consequences of the agreement;</tt></blockquote> | ||
Line 419: | Line 419: | ||
{{REVIEWED | reviewer = [[Megan Ellis|Megan Ellis, QC]], | {{REVIEWED | reviewer = [[Megan Ellis|Megan Ellis, QC]], April 5, 2016}} | ||
{{JP Boyd on Family Law Navbox|type=chapters}} | {{JP Boyd on Family Law Navbox|type=chapters}} |