What is the test for a future review order?
Manitoba, Canada
The following excerpt is from Cleven v. Cleven, 2010 MBQB 279 (CanLII):
We are reminded in Leskun v. Leskun, 2006 SCC 25 (Paragraphs 36 – 39) that review Orders “have a useful but very limited role”. They are justified by genuine and material uncertainty at the time of the original trial (or in this case the parties’ consent Order), but a “failure to tightly circumscribe the issues [for future review] will inevitably be seen by one or the other of the parties as an indication simply to reargue their case”. (Para. 39.)
"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 test for deferential approach by an appellate court in reviewing a family law support order? (Manitoba, Canada)
Is there authority for the proposition that at the time of a prior order was made, it was the correct order? (Manitoba, Canada)
In what circumstances will a judge order a restraining order against a husband for a year? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the standard of deference the court owes to a motion judge in reviewing an order of support? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the current order and what is the effect of the previous order? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the standard of review for appeals from support orders? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the standard of review on an application for judicial review? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the current state of the law on a motion to review a previous support order? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the proper standard of review in the context of a motion for judicial review? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the test for an order of imprisonment for contempt of a contempt of financial disclosure order? (Manitoba, Canada)
