Does the Separation Agreement change the terms of a review to a review?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Mulgrew v Mulgrew, 2022 BCSC 50 (CanLII):
Although the Separation Agreement uses the word “vary”, at the hearing, the parties agreed that a “review” is appropriate: Jordan v. Jordan, 2011 BCCA 518 at paras. 28–34.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the effect of a change in terms of terms and conditions in an employment contract when an employee finds that the terms of their employment contract have been changed so that they no longer exist? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a change in terms of "foreseeable" or "forecast" in the terms of an agreement? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for establishing a collateral agreement where the collateral agreement is inconsistent with or contradicts the written agreement? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will the BC Supreme Court of Justice order a further review order to order that an expert in economic forecasting of the economic circumstances of a separated spouse be reviewed? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of remaining in her position as a result of a change in terms of her employment agreement? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a party claim arrears of maintenance under the terms of a divorce agreement where there has been no application for child support since the divorce agreement was signed? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for ending spousal support under a review clause in a separation agreement? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a change in terms is a material change in circumstances? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a clause in a mortgage agreement be used to change the terms of a co-covenant? (British Columbia, Canada)
If an agreement on all essential terms has been established, does the court need to imply some terms to give business efficacy to the bargain? (British Columbia, Canada)
