Skip to content

Input sought on Nova Scotia pension division and other family property matters

Dante Manna

The Nova Scotia Government is seeking input by way of public survey or written submissions on proposed changes to family property law that would, among other things, affect pension division between former spouses.

The Matrimonial Property Act (“MPA”) provides for division of property, including the pension benefits of either spouse, upon breakdown of a marriage or registered domestic partnership in the province.

Pension division is also regulated by the Pension Benefits Act (“PBA”). However, there is some inconsistency between the MPA and PBA on how pension assets can be divided. The background paper describes this situation as follows:

Under Nova Scotia pension law, a spouse or partner who is not the pension plan member is entitled to a maximum of 50% of the part of the pension that was earned during the relationship. Courts have, on occasion, ordered that a spouse or partner get more than 50% of the pension earned during the relationship. However, it is unclear if the pension plan administrator can do this.

The Government now proposes a new law to provide, among other things, that:

…if a court ordered one person to get more than 50%, the pension plan would be able to pay this amount. Further, in certain circumstances the court could order that the spouse who is not the pension plan member should get part of the pension that was earned before the relationship.

The survey asks questions including:

  • Are there circumstances where it would be important for the court to have the ability to order a spouse or common-law partner who is not the member or pensioner of the pension plan to receive greater than 50% of the pension earned during the marriage or common-law relationship?
  • Are there circumstances where it would be important for the court to have the ability to order the full amount of a pension, not just the portion earned during the marriage or relationship, to be split?

All Nova Scotians are invited to provide feedback on these and other questions by completing the online survey or making written submissions by February 20, 2020.  The Government will also be meeting with legal stakeholders later in February. Pension plan administrators would benefit from greater clarity in the law. Our Pensions and Benefits group would be pleased to discuss this consultation with you and assist with any submissions to the Government.


This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above, please contact a member of our Pensions & Benefits group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Adopting the changes – amendments to the New Brunswick Family Services Act lead to opening of sealed adoption records

June 4, 2018

Vasu Sivapalan and Meg Collins On May 5, 2017, An Act Respecting the Opening of Sealed Adoption Records (“Act”) received royal assent, leading to significant changes for birth parents and adoptees across the province. As…

Read More

Client Update – Protecting the innocent in property insurance: recent amendments to Nova Scotia’s Insurance Act limit “criminal or intentional act” exclusion clauses

May 29, 2018

Jennifer Taylor Recent amendments to the Nova Scotia Insurance Act are designed “to protect the financial interests of an innocent person when the person’s property is damaged by another person with whom that person shares…

Read More

Countdown to Cannabis: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter: The legalization of cannabis: 7 reasons why employers should take notice

May 24, 2018

Brian G. Johnston, QC Cannabis legalization is coming. The legislation is expected to pass by July with legalization becoming effective by September. Employers should take notice because: 1. There is already a lot of cannabis…

Read More

Client Update: Negligence: what is reasonably foreseeable?

May 24, 2018

Janet Clark and Sean Seviour A recent decision from the Supreme Court of Canada clarifies determination of what is “reasonably foreseeable”: Rankin (Rankin’s Garage & Sales) v J.J., 2018 SCC 19.  The case involved two…

Read More

Client Update: Limitation periods & denial of LTD benefits: the NSSC decision in Cameron

May 9, 2018

Jennifer Taylor & Michelle Chai A recent Supreme Court decision tackled two issues that have proven complex in Nova Scotia law: summary judgment and limitation periods. The Plaintiff in Cameron v Nova Scotia Association of…

Read More

Client Update: Medical marijuana found to be undue hardship in safety sensitive positions – the problem of residual impairment

May 1, 2018

Brian G. Johnston, QC The Arbitrator in Lower Churchill Transmission Construction Employers’ Association and IBEW, Local 1620 dismissed a grievance on April 30, 2018 concluding: The Employer did not place the Grievor in employment at…

Read More

Client Update: Benefits plans really do not have to cover the sun, the moon and the stars (and medical cannabis)

April 13, 2018

Rick Dunlop and Richard Jordan Employers, and benefit providers on their behalf, make policy decisions as to what drugs or benefits (including monetary limits) will be covered by benefit plans. The Board of Trustees in…

Read More

Client Update: Court Confirms: Credibility is a Key Factor In Personal Injury Awards (Ryan V. Curlew, 2018 NL SC)

April 10, 2018

Erin Best The decision of Justice Handrigan in Ryan v. Curlew is the first motor vehicle accident personal injury decision to come out of the Newfoundland and Labrador courts in quite some time. The case…

Read More

Client Update: Does your business need a spring privacy tune-up? Breach reporting and Europe’s GDPR are about to hatch

April 6, 2018

Rob Aske The arrival of spring should bring thoughts of renewal… to your privacy practices. Breach reporting under PIPEDA Canada’s federal privacy law known by the acronym PIPEDA (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act)…

Read More

Client Update: Untenable tenure: discrimination complaint from Indigenous professor dismissed

March 22, 2018

Chad Sullivan Overview An Indigenous law professor filed a human rights complaint against the University of British Columbia claiming the university discriminated against her in failing to consider her less traditional scholarly work as akin…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top